So, any females on here fall in the range of [(25.992/2 7), (25.992-7)*2] who live in the Iowa or Minnesota and is looking for a date this friday?
Actually on friday it would have to be [(26.003/2 7), (26.003-7)*2]...
Perhaps a more difficult one (but more important) would be "is-she-my-type" which would fall under an even smaller subset of the "not-too-crazy-to-date".
Considering that we are on forums it's likely that any girl reading them holds a larger chance to fall in the latter category than a random selection of the population...
I think two of the early posters suggested the best mathematics and the best justification for it (combined).
The math was the difference of the logs of the ages.
Increases the probabilities somewhat, but maybe to the point of having to look for only 40-50 years instead of 67. In fact, I'll be disobeying it for another 8 years... *sniff*you also have to factor in the increasing (with age) percentages of your eligible dating pool who are:(a) single because they have Serious Issues and should thus be avoided,or(b) single because having been involved with people from group (a), they are now broken, bitter shells of human almost 28 (and with a much reduced dating pool to start with, at an optimistic 10% of 50% of the population within my non-creepy age range), i try to hold out hope that there's a signficant number left in group (c): people who are just unlucky.
(And this also supports my thesis that men's "dating pools" are wish lists, and women's "dating pools" are queues.)I don't get why everyone is saying that 14 year olds can't date under this formula. but i'm also not sure how much longer it's going to take me to transition from group (b) to group (c)sigh.