Love quantification slides master
1 like1,482 views
The document discusses quantifying and modeling aspects of love. It begins by listing attributes of love that were brainstormed, including care, sharing, passion, and trust. Examples are then given of how some attributes could be quantified, such as setting goals to reduce lies in a relationship each year to measure trust. A paper on quantifying love with mathematical models is referenced, including a simple linear model to represent how Romeo and Juliet's love for each other changes over time based on constants. However, there are limitations to quantifying and modeling something as complex as love.
![Trust
[Caroline]
• Love.Trust.Truthfulness • Other
aspects
of
Trust:
Ambition: No lies. • 1.
‘Truthfulness’
Scale: 2.
Broken
Agreements
Average Black lies/month from 3.
Late
Appointments
[defined sources]. 4.
Late
delivery
Meter: 5.
Gossiping
to
Others
independent confidential log from
sample of the defined sources.
Past Lie Level:
Past [My Old Mate, 2004] 42 <-
Bart
Goal
[My Current Mate, Year = 2005]
Past Lie Level/2
Black: Defined: Non White Lies
www.Gilb.com
Slide
4](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/lovequantificationslidesmaster-130225064719-phpapp01/85/Love-quantification-slides-master-4-320.jpg)
![Camaraderie
(Real
Case
UK)
Ambi@on:
to
maintain
an
excep,onally
high
sense
of
good
personal
feelings
and
co-‐opera,on
amongst
all
staff:
family
atmosphere,
corporate
patrio,sm.
In
spite
of
business
change
and
pressures.
Scale:
probability
that
individuals
enjoy
the
working
atmosphere
so
much
that
they
would
not
move
to
another
company
for
less
than
50%
pay
rise.
Meter:
Apparently
real
offer
via
CD-‐S
Past
[September
2001]
60+
%
<-‐
R
&
CD
Goal
[Mid
2002]
10%,
[End
2002]
<1%
<-‐
R
&
CD
Ra@onale:
maintain
staff
number,
and
morale
as
core
of
business
and
business
predictability
for
customers.
www.Gilb.com
Slide
5](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/lovequantificationslidesmaster-130225064719-phpapp01/85/Love-quantification-slides-master-5-320.jpg)
Love quantification slides master
- 1. Love Quantification a 4.5 minute lightening Talk at ACCU Conference, Oxford April 15 2010 tom@gilb.com www.gilb.com Subset April 15 2010
- 2. 8. Quantify Exercise: Aspects of Love, or Love is a many splendored thing! • Make inventory of love’s many aspects • QuanOfy one requirements for love • DuraOon: 6 minutes See note for Sutra www.Gilb.com Slide 2
- 3. Love ATributes: Brainstormed By Dutch Engineers • Kissed-‐ness • Care • Support • Sharing • Attention • Respect • Passion • Comfort • Satisfaction • Friendship • ... • Sex • ... • Understanding • ... • Trust www.Gilb.com Slide 3
- 4. Trust [Caroline] • Love.Trust.Truthfulness • Other aspects of Trust: Ambition: No lies. • 1. ‘Truthfulness’ Scale: 2. Broken Agreements Average Black lies/month from 3. Late Appointments [defined sources]. 4. Late delivery Meter: 5. Gossiping to Others independent confidential log from sample of the defined sources. Past Lie Level: Past [My Old Mate, 2004] 42 <- Bart Goal [My Current Mate, Year = 2005] Past Lie Level/2 Black: Defined: Non White Lies www.Gilb.com Slide 4
- 5. Camaraderie (Real Case UK) Ambi@on: to maintain an excep,onally high sense of good personal feelings and co-‐opera,on amongst all staff: family atmosphere, corporate patrio,sm. In spite of business change and pressures. Scale: probability that individuals enjoy the working atmosphere so much that they would not move to another company for less than 50% pay rise. Meter: Apparently real offer via CD-‐S Past [September 2001] 60+ % <-‐ R & CD Goal [Mid 2002] 10%, [End 2002] <1% <-‐ R & CD Ra@onale: maintain staff number, and morale as core of business and business predictability for customers. www.Gilb.com Slide 5
- 6. My ‘ChrisOan’ Friend • Lawrence Day. SeaTle Washington • “Love is not quanOfiable” – Not in Bible – LiTle guidance from God and Jesus
- 7. Love: Biblical Dimensions <-‐ Lawrence Day, Boeing A person who loves acts the following way toward the person being loved: The biblical cita@on (Book of First 1. suffereth long Corinthians, Chapter 2. is kind 13) I included gives the 3. envieth not quan@fica@on of the 4. vaunteth not itself, vaunteth...: term "love" (agape in or, is not rash (Vaunt = extravagant self praise) Greek). The 5. is not puffed up ‘quan@fica@on’ for love 6. Doth not behave itself unseemly would be as follows: 7. seeketh not her own 8. is not easily provoked -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐> 9. thinketh no evil 10. Rejoiceth not in iniquity (=an unjust act) 11. rejoiceth in the truth 12. Beareth all things 13. believeth all things 14. hopeth all things 15. endureth all things 16. never faileth www.Gilb.com Slide 7
- 8. A Paper on ‘Love QuanOfied’ hTp://www.gilb.com/Oki-‐download_file.php?fileId=335 -‐download_file.php? fileId=335 •
- 9. MathemaOcal Models of Love & Happiness J. C. Sproe Department of Physics University of Wisconsin -‐ Madison Presented to the Chaos and Complex Systems Seminar in Madison, Wisconsin on February 6, 2001
- 10. Outline • Love model -‐ Inspired by Steve Strogatz (Cornell University) • Happiness model -‐ In collaboraOon with Keith Warren (Ohio State Univ)
- 11. Simple Linear Model • dR/dt = aR + bJ • dJ/dt = cR + dJ • where – R is Romeo’s love for Juliet – J is Juliet’s love for Romeo – (or hate if negaOve) – a, b, c, d are constants that determine the “RomanOc styles”
- 12. LimitaOons of Model • It’s difficult to quanOfy and measure love and hate. • Love is not a scalar (different types). • Parameters change in Ome and with the situaOon. • Parameters may be different for love and hate.
- 13. Some “RomanOc Styles” dR/dt = aR + bJ • a=0 (out of touch with own feelings) • b=0 (oblivious to other’s feelings) • a>0, b>0 (eager beaver) • a>0, b<0 (narcissisOc nerd) • a<0, b>0 (cauOous lover) • a<0, b<0 (hermit)
- 14. Number of Pairings • 6 styles for Romeo X 6 styles for Juliet = 36 different pairings. • Only 21 give unique dynamics (because of R/J symmetry) but… It’s actually worse than that: • 4 parameters with 3 choices (-‐,0,+) for each gives 34 = 81 combinaOons of which 45 are unique • And there are subclasses depending on values and iniOal condiOons.
- 15. Both out of touch with their own feelings 0 • dR/dt = aR + bJ • dJ/dt = cR + dJ 0 • Four subclasses: – b > 0, c > 0 (mutual love fest or war) – b > 0, c < 0 (never-‐ending cycle) – b < 0, c > 0 (never-‐ending cycle) – b < 0, c < 0 (unrequited love)
- 16. Out of touch with their own feelings (conOnued) b > 0, c > 0 b < 0, c < 0 b > 0, c < 0 War Two lovers Two nerds Nerd + lover Love fest (or war) Unrequited love Never-ending cycle
- 17. With Self-‐Awareness and bc < 0 (nerd + lover) a + d < -2|bc|1/2 a+d<0 a+d>0 Extremely cautious Somewhat cautious Overly eager Rapid apathy Eventual apathy Growing volatility (The only equilibrium is apathy)
- 18. Fire and Water (Do opposites aTract?) • Take c = -‐b and d = -‐a • Result depends on a, c, and the iniOal condiOons • Can end up in any quadrant • Or with a steady oscillaOon • But never apathy
- 19. Peas in a Pod (Are clones bored or blissful?) • Take c = b and d = a • Result depends on a, b, and the iniOal condiOons • Can end up in any quadrant • Or at the origin (boredom) • But no oscillaOons
- 20. Romeo the Robot (How does Juliet react?) • Take a = b = 0 (dR/dt = 0) • dJ/dt = cR + dJ • There is an equilibrium at J = -‐cR/d • Can be either love or hate depending on signs of R, c, and d • Stable if d < 0, unstable if d > 0 • Her feelings never die • No oscillaOons are possible
- 21. Effect of NonlineariOes Replace ax with ax(1-|x|), etc. (logistic function) ax(1 - |x|) ax a tanh x x
- 22. New kinds of Dynamics New equilibrium points Limit cycles (but no chaos in 2D)
- 23. A Love Triangle • Romeo has a mistress, Guinevere • Guinevere and Juliet don’t know about one another • Romeo responds to each with the same romanOc style (same a and b) • Guinevere’s hate has the same effect on his feelings for Juliet as does Juliet’s love, and vice versa
- 24. Love Triangle EquaOons • dRJ/dt = aRJ + b(J -‐ G) • dJ/dt = cRJ + dJ • dRG/dt = aRG + b(G -‐ J) • dG/dt = eRG + fG • System is 4D (4 variables) • There are 6 parameters • System is linear (no chaos)
- 25. Linear Love Triangle Examples
- 26. Romeo’s Fate • Averaged over all romanOc styles (combinaOons of parameters) and iniOal condiOons: – 37% loves Juliet & hates Guinevere – 37% loves Guinevere & hates Juliet – 6% loves both (2% everyone in love) – 6% hates both (2% everyone in hate) – 14% apathy (10% everyone apatheOc) • Anything can happen!
- 27. One ChaoOc SoluOon of Nonlinear Love Triangle “Strange attractor of love” a,b,c,f > 0; d,e < 0 (Romeo is an “eager beaver”)
- 28. Possible Further Studies • What happens if Guinevere and Juliet know about one another? (6D system) • What happens if only Guinevere knows about Juliet? (5D system, asymmetric) • What happens if Juliet and/or Guinevere has another lover? (6D or 8D system) • What are the dynamics of a free-‐love commune? (large-‐D system) • Is there an opOmum pairing of romanOc styles that encourages success or portends failure? If such problems interest you, let’s collaborate!
- 29. Simple 2D Linear Model • dR/dt = aR + bJ • dJ/dt = cR + dJ • d2R/dt2 + βdR/dt + ω2R = 0 – β = -‐a -‐ d (damping) – ω2 = ad -‐ bc (frequency)
- 30. SoluOons of 2-‐D Linear System
- 31. Happiness Model • d2x/dt2 + βdx/dt + ω2x = F(t) Damping Oscillation External forces • Happiness: H = dx/dt – HabituaOon – AcclimaOon – AdaptaOon • Only changes are perceived
- 32. What is x? • x = integral of H • x is what others perceive • H (your happiness) must average to zero (with posiOve damping) • x does not average to zero
- 34. Drug or Other AddicOon
- 36. Random Events
- 37. Real Life
- 38. Parameter Space β 2 ω
- 39. Some ImplicaOons • Constant happiness is an unrealisOc goal. • Others see less volaOlity in you and oxen wrongly conclude how you feel. • Individuals can be categorized by their values of β and ω. • Manic depression may correspond to β ~ 0. • Long prison terms may be ineffecOve.
- 40. A few other happiness studies • Brickman, Coates & Janoff-‐Bulman (1978) report only small differences in life saOsfacOon between paraplegics, control subjects, and loTery winners. • Lykken (1981) reports that religious people are not noOceably happier than freethinkers. • Diener & Diener (1996) review studies indicaOng that all American socioeconomic groups score above neutral in life saOsfacOon, as do people with severe disabiliOes.
- 41. What disabiliOes, you ask? • Hellmich (1995) reports that 84% of individuals with extreme quadriplegia say that their life is average or above average. • Delespaul & DeVries (1987) report that people with chronic mental problems claim posiOve well-‐being.
- 42. As for the dynamics • Silver (1982) reports that individuals with spinal cord injuries are very unhappy immediately following their injury, but that 58% state that happiness is their strongest emoOon by the third week axer their injuries. • Suh, Diener, & Fujita (1996) report that good and bad events have almost no effect on happiness axer 6 months.
- 43. In Summary ... (Lykken 1999) • There seem to be no permanent ups and downs; natural selecOon has made us this way, because, by accommodaOng to both adversity and to good fortune in this fashion, we remain more producOve, more adaptable to changing circumstances, and more likely to have viable offspring.
- 44. Other Similar QualiOes • Sense of wealth • Health • Intelligence • Skills • Senses – hot/cold – smell – vision – hearing ...
- 45. Summary • Love and happiness are wonderful • So is mathemaOcs
- 46. References • hTp://sproT.physics.wisc.edu/ lectures/ love&hap/ (This talk) • Steven H. Strogatz, Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos (Addison-‐Wesley, 1994) • sproT@juno.physics.wisc.edu