The psychology of women is what we could mathematically compare the system of Navier-Stokes equations that govern the fluid motion, which is a jumble of partial differential equations in which the number of unknowns exceeds by almost three times the number of equations available to solve them in a mega mess nonlinear. Simply put a fucking hell is unsolvable.
There is in fact a global solution that allows it to be applied to all problems, that is, allowing to describe the unfolding of events of that particular type. But you can try to design a simplified linear model, which approximates the actual situation, less than a certain margin of error, beyond which we can improve our accuracy. The convenience of the linear model is that it makes the system modular into several parts, they also linear, combined in certain ways that approximate the problem quite well, giving us an idea of \u200b\u200bhow things actually go. Imagine a square: it is a linear model, as it can think of as the union of 4 lines, perpendicular two by two, and of which you know in what proportions are. Think instead of a circle: now the system is no longer linear, because you can not express its function in the form of simple shapes such as lines precisely. So what can you do? You could for example think of a hexagon inscribed within the circle. State that is approaching a round shape with straight lines. Obviously in the case of a hexagon to the nearest is very coarse. you might think of halving the angles and double sides, thus obtaining a dodecagon. Now the approximation is better, but still not enough. Repeating the process of halving and doubling numbers side corners over and over again, until the difference between the value of the perimeter of the circle and that of your polygon is not quite acceptable in value that you decide a priori, you can get something that is very much like the circumference of your departure, but with minor differences. State that is evaluating the error of your approximation.
Well this model is also applicable to female psychology. For example: behavior in relation to some external stimulus. The field is varied, but take for example a common thing to all women: shopping.
Shopping is a problem highly non-linear, which results in a disproportionate number of unknowns, and a small number of reports relate. How
linearize the problem? Meanwhile, we must understand which variables are more important than others, point to the uncertainty that is fundamental, so to speak, are the masters in our particular problem. Once you find the various uncertainties, which may for example be the shoes, the models currently in vogue in the latest edition of Vogue, the bright colors, with matching handbag, the time (in hours) of choice, the coefficient of pounding balls at once during a session of shopping, and many others, you can get an idea of \u200b\u200bhow things could evolve. Experimental data indicate that the results tend to shop more and asymptotically complete or partial destruction of the individual male companion. Wanting
then a rough approximation we could build our valuation equation as follows:
Tr '= Ts (c - c0) + 1 / 2 Ab '( c) * (c - c0 ) +1 / 3 UVG ''( c) * (c - c0) ^ 2 *
where
Tr = time pain in the ass
Ts = time of choice
Ab = coefficient of coupling with her purse
UVG = coefficient of influence of the last Vogue Color
(') first derivative
('') second derivative
and of course the main unknown is the color "c", while "c0" is the "starting color" or an experimental measure of departure that gives us a starting point for information on the evolution of our unknown, probably early in the session that the color of shopping is the most accredited (but make no mistake, it is usually subject to strong fluctuations, unpredictable mathematically). (Sorry for the repetition of "start", but is a very important concept that you must keep well in mind. I do it for you)
With this equation, starting from some experimental data obtained with previous experience in the field, alas, we can calculate how long it may cause damage (it is clear that in this case the failures are to be considered for wear, and are therefore subject to or at most a linear distribution may be approximated by a Gaussian, which simplifies our calculations considerably) significant and important for the functionality of the system of endurance, with a good approximation. Experimental data attest to the Tr average about 3 / 4 of an hour. Mine is 8 ms.
And in fact in many cases, mathematics can help us to interpret this strange natural phenomenon that is the woman. I personally prefer a more statistical approach, simultaneously applying the so-called principle of non-contradiction of Aristotle (slightly modified). That is: never contradict. Statistically, it is found that 91% of the time this system is effective, except in those situations that require unpredictable in a contradiction, but in the context of which all the elements seem to portend the need not contradict. Example:
" Have you seen Sarah? Dressed so you do not looked like a pan? " (here all the elements leading to the natural conclusion is that a rhetorical question whose answer is "SI")
" Yes, dear, you're right " (I apply the principle of non-contradiction, perhaps adding a smile contour)
" Ah, so if I seem a pan so clothed? "Patatrac. There is no way out. We are in the typical case of experimental failure.
That 9% of cases are unfortunately still a subject of study, and there are no comprehensive theories and experimental data at the time. 91% is still a good result, and the skill at this point is all in how we manage that in 10 when things go wrong. But there, alas, there is no math that can help us.
*Si è scelto uno sviluppo in serie di Taylor per la nostra equazione da integrare in quanto è nota la sua ottima proprietà linearizzatrice delle funzioni.
