Finding the perfect mix

[bjf]

Yes, this is true for

some. How do we use this information?

Say, for instance, it was true for all women, I guess that would

support using the average male phero signature ratios.

The ratios, though, are extremely high in A1 and not

all that conducive to positive results for us.

Rone sometimes is called "fatherly." I'm not sure if it

reminds a woman of her father or being with her father, maybe. In most cases though, the feeling of being with a

father probably includes such things as reliability, safety, leadership and intimacy (rone, a1, beta nol).



So how are these things waited in the board spectrum of preferences. How much danger (ie none) is

appropriate without scaring a woman off? Danger is sexy but only to a certain point.

The interesting thing to

also consider is whether using a number of pheromones projects a lot of different signals or whether they combine to

send one signal, one overall feeling.

Is it heterogeneous or homogeneous? For instance, a salad tastes like a

lot of different things in your mouth. A milk shake basically tastes like one flavor -- the different elements get

tempered by one another -- milk plus chocolate ice creme becomes something in between the two.

Maybe an

attractive trait like leadership isnt one pheromone per say but something like nol plus none in a general

ratio.

I guess I'm just looking for us to establish some basic ratios between the dark, medium and light

pheromones that we can use as a guide for recipe making. Back in the day people would mix none with none products. I

would do none heavy mixes. None was thought to be sexual so that was the overwhelming component of a lot of mixes

for some. Of course, myself and many others found it was too much Clint Eastwood for women to

handle.

Generally, nicer mones that mitigate some of the dangers of none improves things because, as the

study in the first post supports, women aren't looking for the most masculine guy as possible in mate selection, at

least for most of their cycles.

So, on average, how much bad boy, how much father figure and how much friend

makes the perfect man? Might be tough to quantify but I am sure there is a mathematical rhyme and reason to this.

I've heard they even have computer programs that evaluate whether a song will be a hit. As long as something is

predictable, there's a formula for it.

The computer program may not be able to tell if a particular person

will like a song but it can tell if it is conducive to being a pop hit to the general

audience.

Updated: 05:25 AM EST
Scientists Figure Out Why Mona Lisa

Smiles
By TOBY STERLING, AP
AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (Dec. 16) - The mysterious half-smile that has intrigued

viewers of the Mona Lisa for centuries isn't really that difficult to interpret, Dutch researchers said

Thursday.
She was smiling because she was happy - 83 percent happy, to be exact, according to scientists from the

University of Amsterdam.

In what they viewed as a fun demonstration of technology rather than a serious

experiment, the researchers scanned a reproduction of Leonardo da Vinci's masterpiece and subjected it to

cutting-edge "emotion recognition" software, developed in collaboration with the University of Illinois.

The

result showed the painting's famous subject was 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful and 2

percent angry. She was less than 1 percent neutral, and not at all surprised.

Leonardo began work on the

painting in 1503, and it now hangs in the Louvre in Paris.
The work, also known as "La Gioconda," is believed to

have portrayed the wife of Francesco del Giocondo. The title is a play on her husband's name, and also means "the

jolly lady" in Italian.
Harro Stokman, a professor at the University of Amsterdam involved in the experiment,

said the researchers knew the results would be unscientific - the software isn't designed to register subtle

emotions. So it couldn't detect the hint of sexual suggestion or disdain many have read into Mona Lisa's

eyes.

In addition, the technology is designed for use with modern digital films and images, and subjects

first need to be scanned in a neutral emotionless state to accurately detect their current emotion.

Lead

researcher Nicu Sebe took the challenge as seriously as he could, using the faces of 10 women of Mediterranean

ancestry to create a composite image of a neutral expression. He then compared that to the face in the painting,

scoring it on the basis of six emotions: happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear and sadness.

"Basically,

it's like casting a spider web over the face to break it down into tiny segments," Stokman said. "Then you look for

minute differences in the flare of the nostril or depth of the wrinkles around the eyes."

Stokman said with a

reading of 83 percent, it's clear happiness was the woman's main emotion.
Biometrics experts not involved with

the experiment said the results were interesting even if they aren't the last word on the Mona Lisa.

"Facial

recognition technology is advancing rapidly, but emotional recognition is really still in its infancy," said Larry

Hornak, director of the Center for Identification Technology Research at West Virginia University.

"It sounds

like they did try to use a data set, even if it was small, and that's typical of work in an area like this that's

relatively new. It's an interesting result," he said.
Stokman said he knew the University of Amsterdam effort

won't prove or disprove controversial theories about the painting. One is that it was actually a self-portrait of

Leonardo himself as a woman.

"But who knows, in 30, 40, 50 years, maybe they'll be able to tell what was on

her mind," Stokman said.

Hornak agreed the idea was entertaining.

"It's always fun to apply

technology to areas of public interest, and sometimes you can come up with results that are very illuminating," he

said.

Jim Wayman, a biometrics researcher at San Jose State University agreed.

"It's hocus pocus, not

serious science," Wayman said. "But it's good for a laugh, and it doesn't hurt

anybody.
------------------------------------

[bjf]

"Penton-Voak, Little, Jones, Burt,

Tiddleman, and Perrett (2003) performed a study to discover if female condition (other-rated facial attractiveness,

or how their own faces were rated by others in terms of attractiveness and WHR) had any effect on their preference

for sexual dimorphism in male faces. They presented women with computer graphically altered images of the male faces

in their masculinized form and in their feminized form. There were 6 different faces in all, with 5 images of each

face. The images ranged from 50% masculinized to 30% masculinized (airbrushed to look less masculine) to average to

30% feminized (airbrushed to look more feminine than masculine) to 50% feminized on a continuum. The 50% feminized

images were the same male face made to look decidedly feminine. The results show that women with unattractive (high)

WHR and low other-rated facial attractiveness preferred the more feminine male faces when choosing faces for a

long-term relationship than for a short-term relationship, while females who were rated as more attractive did not

have a different preference for long-term and short-term relationships.

[catlord17]

Interesting thread. The only

thing I wanted to add was that when considering someone like Brad Pitt as an "ideal man", you have to consider the

fact that he's not really any more or less "ideal" than any fairly good looking man out there. The fact is, he is

famous (well advertised) and rich (capable of supporting woman and child). If it were not for those two things, I

seriously doubt he'd be any more interesting to your average woman than any other male. "Civilized society",

especially American society, has trained women to believe that "famous" men are automatically desireable based on

the same priciples that make Gucci purses desireable, for example - they're "name brand" and "fasionable" and

"exclusive", and they involve a lot of money.

That's my 2 cents, anyway.

[bjf]

Agreed, Catlord!

Although I

didn't think people would know Joe Schmore from down my block, so I used Brad Pitt as an ex.