Daniel's Relapse into Physics Nerdity

Just a note on my most recent post entitled "My Cheap Roommate." It turns out that the slow internet was the providers fault. Balki called them and got them to give us an awesome price for the next year. Ooops. Notice I say "oops" but make no apology for the false accusation. Given his track record for cheapness any reasonable person would have jumped to the same conclusion, that he instituted some new money saving scheme and that screwed up the internet. You know how you have a friend who never actually has a job, but always comes up with different money making schemes? Well Balki is kinda like that but he takes the "Penny saved is a Penny earned principle" to new heights. Every flipping day there's a new money saving technique. I feel like Walmart and Welfare had a really ugly child and made him live-in property manager of an otherwise sweet house that I decided to live in. Enough on that for now.


"Jerry! I just figured out how to save money on groceries by giving a liberal interpretation to expiry dates on dairy products." Just another crazy Kramerism? Nope that's just my cheap roommate, verbatim.



So for those of you who don't know I did my undergrad in Physics and English (Most Unique Double Major Ever, thank you very much!). The former part of my completed degree would thus imply that at one time, before I became a slick law type, I was a math/science nerd. That's right - I actually know what e=mc2 means (something about time travel) and I can solve complex problems using a computing program called Maple!


Me (circa 2001) - Before a malfunctioning proton accelarator transformed me into Awesome Man.

That being said, I have used my repressed nerdiness and mathematical prowess to solve one of the most pressing sociological issues of our time: ie, how does one rate menages a trois on a scale of 1 to 10 as a function of the respective rating of the two other participants in the threesome.

(Note: This is a purely theoretical exercise pusuant to a drunken conversation. I have no interest in engaging in a threesome since sex without intimacy is as empty as a tub of Ben and Jerry's in Oprah's dressing room. A Loving Committed relaitionship is way more enjoyable than sexual gratification with multiple partners. Hi Sweetie! )

That being said I think it's high time that the swingers of the world had a comprehensive mathematical model to rate how groovy or lame their orgy experience was. Thus I present to you...

DFlatt's Theory of Threesome Rating -

Variables:
T = Overall Threesome Rating

X = Rating of 1^st Partner (standard 1-10 scale)

Y = Rating of 2^nd Partner (standard (1-10 scale)

Note: 1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest but those extremes are basically unattainable. 1 would mean "so nasty that you go blind," and 10 would be "the sexual equivalent of free basing heroine - if your heart doesn't stop you will think about nothing else for the rest of your life." My girlfriend is a 10. That's also why she doesn't mind when I write perverted manifestos like this.

Z = Average of X and Y = (X + Y)/2

R = Personal Standard of Repulsion Factor (i.e. rating below which you would not fool around with someone even if you were really drunk.)

Equations:

If Z = R: T = Z.

If Z = R: T = Z x log₁₀(Z).

If Z > R: T = Z / log₁₀(Z).

Go ahead plug in some values, using people you know and have rated. Try it out.

Basically the implications of my theory are that everyone has a standard (even if it's really really disturbingly low) below which they will not sleep with someone even if they're smashed on absinthe. Thus, if they engaged in group sex with two partners whose average rating was below that minimum standard we could assume that the experience would be even more traumatizing for them, than if they were forced into bed with one such troll. Par example, imagine having to sleep with Michael Jackson (in his current nose-falling-off incarnation NOT his effeminate yet dreamy Thriller incarnation circa 1982) vs having to sleep with Michael AND that skeleton thing that hosted Tales From the Crypt. As bad as the first option is you'd obviously rate the former encounter as less disturbing.

Faced with this dillemma most people would spontaneously chooose the little known third option of hari-kiri or ritual self-disembowlment.

Then again if you were to have a threesome with two really hot people then you would obviously say that it was a higher rated sexual experience than with just one hot person. For example you somehow managed to coax Halle Berry into bed and then when you called her up to make sure you're still on for tonight, she said that her twin sister (who was also an actress but after mixed reviews off-broadway turned to a career in porn and learned a few useful and acrobatic tricks) also wanted to get freaky. Logically, in this case two would be better than one and you would rate the threesome as a more awesome experience than the initial proposition.

"No Halle. I'd prefer you came alone. I only have room for one voluptous torso in my freezer..." is what the only guy insane enough to turn down this threesome would say.

The theory has a few flaws that have been pointed out by members of the scientific community already - basically drew and his friend Shank in a threeway (hey homoerotic double entendre!) msn conversation. I won't outline them but rather allow you the reader to suggest improvements on the model yourselves. The theory is thus officially published and thus subject to the scrutiny of the scientific community. Tear it apart you bloodthirsty hounds. Do your worst.