The Cellar - View Single Post

Riddil · 01-06-2004, 06:03 PM

(edit: post updated with yet more boring equations, sorry!)

I completely agree my post is a simplification... but I disagree that it's an oversimplification.

Students still use "3.14" for Pi... even though it's a severe simplification. I guarantee you'll never find a NASA engineer that uses "3.14". But for a student, they are able to use 3.14 and while they won't have the 100% correct answer, it's still accurate enough to pull meaningful conclusions.

Same thing here.

I agree that long-term relationships have another level of bonding. Maybe that could be another rating scale which runs from 1-100. As you build those experiences-with-your partner it slowly raises the "relationship-strength" rating. So while you may be in a 75-rated relationship, after 30 years you've had enough experiences that the relationship-strength value is so high that no one could pull it apart, no matter what their personal rating is.

Maybe the "interest level in a person" could be defined in a function something like:

interest = personal_rating * (relationship_strength/100)

Meaning that a 75-rated relationship with a 100 rated relationship-strength yeilds a net of 75. If that person then met a total stranger with a personal rating of 100, the net would be 100 * .01, or a net of only 1. Not even close to being a strong enough motivator to leave the 75-rated partner.

And relationship-strength CAN change to the negative over time. If a husband waits on his wife hand-and-foot when she's hospitalized there are several deposits to that scale quickly. But if 10 years down the road he's more interested in football than talking to her and forgets their anniversary, then the scale takes some hefty withdrawals. So, unlike the personal-rating scale, the relationship-strength scale is more capable of fluctuating greatly (albeit slowly), and has no "max limit" comparable to the compatibility-index that dictates the max on the personal-rating-scale.

However, it's still not that easy. Say for example you've reached a relationship-strength of 30 in your 75-rated relationship after 5 years of being together, then you may assume that after 5 years with a 95-rated person you would also reach a rating of 30. So even though today that 95'er is cummulatively rated lower, when you look at the 5-year potential, they match up:

75 * (30/100) = 22.5
95 * (30/100) = 28.5

And as more time passes that 95-rated person continues to increase faster and faster. (Think interest on a bank balance). However, if a couple is together for 20 years and reaches a relationship-strength level of 80, it would take a long, long time for even a 95-rated person to reach a matching level. Basically this means that the longer a couple is together, it's not so much that the motivation to leave your 75-rated partner for that 95-rated prospect decreases... it's just that you understand you don't have enough time on Earth to see a net positive gain by the change, you'll be happier with the 75'er.

So what does that mean? It means that if at-this-very-second if both the 75-partner and the 95-prospect called to tell you they needed your help right now, you would go help the 75'er, since they currently rate higher. However, the next day you might leave the 75'er because your potential-gain is higher in the long run with the 95'er.

(I could go on, maybe even add a "calculated risk" number to the equation which effects the decision model for leaving your current partner... but I think you see my point)

Wow. I think I've now crossed the bridge into complete, and total engineer world. I can only think in numbers.

01-06-2004, 06:03 PM	#3
Riddil Management Consultant Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 165	(edit: post updated with yet more boring equations, sorry!) I completely agree my post is a simplification... but I disagree that it's an oversimplification. Students still use "3.14" for Pi... even though it's a severe simplification. I guarantee you'll never find a NASA engineer that uses "3.14". But for a student, they are able to use 3.14 and while they won't have the 100% correct answer, it's still accurate enough to pull meaningful conclusions. Same thing here. I agree that long-term relationships have another level of bonding. Maybe that could be another rating scale which runs from 1-100. As you build those experiences-with-your partner it slowly raises the "relationship-strength" rating. So while you may be in a 75-rated relationship, after 30 years you've had enough experiences that the relationship-strength value is so high that no one could pull it apart, no matter what their personal rating is. Maybe the "interest level in a person" could be defined in a function something like: interest = personal_rating * (relationship_strength/100) Meaning that a 75-rated relationship with a 100 rated relationship-strength yeilds a net of 75. If that person then met a total stranger with a personal rating of 100, the net would be 100 * .01, or a net of only 1. Not even close to being a strong enough motivator to leave the 75-rated partner. And relationship-strength CAN change to the negative over time. If a husband waits on his wife hand-and-foot when she's hospitalized there are several deposits to that scale quickly. But if 10 years down the road he's more interested in football than talking to her and forgets their anniversary, then the scale takes some hefty withdrawals. So, unlike the personal-rating scale, the relationship-strength scale is more capable of fluctuating greatly (albeit slowly), and has no "max limit" comparable to the compatibility-index that dictates the max on the personal-rating-scale. However, it's still not that easy. Say for example you've reached a relationship-strength of 30 in your 75-rated relationship after 5 years of being together, then you may assume that after 5 years with a 95-rated person you would also reach a rating of 30. So even though today that 95'er is cummulatively rated lower, when you look at the 5-year potential, they match up: 75 * (30/100) = 22.5 95 * (30/100) = 28.5 And as more time passes that 95-rated person continues to increase faster and faster. (Think interest on a bank balance). However, if a couple is together for 20 years and reaches a relationship-strength level of 80, it would take a long, long time for even a 95-rated person to reach a matching level. Basically this means that the longer a couple is together, it's not so much that the motivation to leave your 75-rated partner for that 95-rated prospect decreases... it's just that you understand you don't have enough time on Earth to see a net positive gain by the change, you'll be happier with the 75'er. So what does that mean? It means that if at-this-very-second if both the 75-partner and the 95-prospect called to tell you they needed your help right now, you would go help the 75'er, since they currently rate higher. However, the next day you might leave the 75'er because your potential-gain is higher in the long run with the 95'er. (I could go on, maybe even add a "calculated risk" number to the equation which effects the decision model for leaving your current partner... but I think you see my point) Wow. I think I've now crossed the bridge into complete, and total engineer world. I can only think in numbers. Last edited by Riddil; 01-06-2004 at 06:53 PM.