# Equations & formulae

Page 1 of 1

160438.  Tue Mar 27, 2007 10:27 am

Here is a selection of 'media equations' that have been commissioned from academics (of 'boffins', as we like to know them) on slow news days. Maybe we could put them on cards, perhaps with the meaning of the variables, and get the guests to work out what each is for.

Happiness
 Code: P + (5E) + (3H)

P = Personal Characteristics, including outlook on life, adaptability and resilience.
E = Existence and relates to health, financial stability and friendships.
H = Higher Order needs, and covers self-esteem, expectations, ambitions and sense of humour.
There is an accompanying list of questions on which the equations are based, that generate numerical values to put into the equation.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2630869.stm

A great arse
 Code: (S+C) x (B+F) --------------     (T-V)

S = overall shape (a ripe peach being just about right)
C = circularity (rounder is better)
B = bounciness (less wobble is preferred)
F = firmness (too much push to that cushion loses points)
T = skin texture (no cellulite, please)
V = the ratio of one's hips to waist. Finally, do the math.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,191622,00.html

Whether to hire a prostitute
U = satisfaction. It's what you, as a prostitute, care about - the satisfaction you gain from selling your services. Economists like to call it "utility", which is why they like to use the letter "U".
L i= amount of leisure you have.
C = amount of goods and services you, as a consumer, consume.
S = amount of prostitution you, as a prostitute, sell to your customers.
W = going price for prostitutes.
R = measure of your reputation.
The whole situation, seemingly so complicated, boils down to a nice partial differential equation. Here it is - a Della Giusta, Di Tommaso and Strom's rule of thumb for prostitutes. You, a prostitute, find it worthwhile to sell your services when:
 Code: [(δU/δL) / (δU/δC) | Sp=0] ≤ w - [(δU/δr) / (δU/δC) | S = 0]
 Code: ((U+C+I) x (10-S))/20 x A x 1/(1-sin(F/10))

U = urgency
C = complexity
I = importance
S = skill
F = frequency
Each variable is scored between 0 and 9. A sixth, aggravation (A), was set at 0.7 by the boffins after their poll of 1,000 people.
http://www.britishgasnews.co.uk/index.asp?PageID=16&Year=2004&NewsID=623

Optimal biscuit dunking

(They don't mention the meaning of the variables, though.)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/462987.stm

 Code: ([W + (D-d)] x TQ) ÷ (M x NA)

W = weather
D = debt
d = money due in January pay
T = time elapsed since Christmas
Q = time since failed New Year's resolutions to quit smoking, drinking etc,
M = general motivational levels
NA = the need to take action
http://living.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=108812006

Beer goggle effectiveness

An = number of units of alcohol consumed
S = smokiness of the room (graded from 0-10, where 0 clear air; 10 extremely smoky)
L = luminance of 'person of interest' (candelas per square metre; typically 1 pitch black; 150 as seen in normal room lighting)
Vo = Snellen visual acuity (6/6 normal; 6/12 just meets driving standard)
d = distance from 'person of interest' (metres; 0.5 to 3 metres)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/4468884.stm

Procrastination
 Code: U = E x V / I x D

U = desire to complete the task
E = the expectation of success
V = the value of completion
I = the immediacy of task
D = the personal sensitivity to delay

Source

 160450.  Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:04 am If nothing else, the one about the nice bottom fits nicely with the nice bottom in Molly's Secret Museum at post 160342, and would then connect through to the one about prostitution and so maybe to Lady Hamilton or something.

 160762.  Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:21 am A long time ago, I came up with a measuring unit for drunkenness - 1 bout. The "formula" for it was as follows: gram x%of alcohol ________________ = 1 bout person per second It is a joke, of course...

 162279.  Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:06 am Related to the subject of measuring happiness, the worst day of the year, and so on, through equations: a survey reported in newspapers on 9 March 07 says that Bournemouth is “the happiest town in the country,” and Walsall is the least happy town. These nonsense surveys are something it might be fun to have a go at, particularly if we could find some good contradictions - one survey saying that x is the happiest/saddest/fattest/healthiest town in the country, and another survey saying just the opposite. Does anyone think this is worth my while following up? (Links to Epidemiology, through dodgy use of statistics).

164472.  Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:46 am

Ian Dunn on the outer forums came up with this, which I thought was quite good fun:

 Ian Dunn wrote: 164214. Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:47 pm I found this story on the BBC website. Scientists at Leeds University have calculated a mathematical formula for the perfect bacon sandwich. It is two or three back bacon rashers placed in a preheated oven for seven minutes at 240C or 475F, then placed between two slices of farmhouse bread between 1-2cm thick. It took the university over 1,000 hours to test the results testing 700 different variations. The formula is: Quote: N = C + {fb (cm) . fb (tc)} + fb (Ts) + fc . ta N=force in Newtons required to break the cooked bacon fb=function of the bacon type fc=function of the condiment/filling effect Ts=serving temperature tc=cooking time ta=time or duration of application of condiment/filling cm=cooking method C=Newtons required to break uncooked bacon. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_yorkshire/6538643.stm

Page 1 of 1

All times are GMT - 5 Hours

Display posts from previous:

Forum tools
User tools