That makes sense... so a person could be considered an atom from the periodic table. That atom will bond to make its electron shell filled (unless it already is), and although there are plenty of atoms to bond, certain ones make more of a match like Lithium (Li) with Chloride (Cl) but it could also bond with Sulfur (S) but if that Lithium had its "choice" then its electronegativity would make it choose Cl. You're saying the same thing happens with people?
Yes, you're on the right path. In the human case, however, the model is scaled up, such that people are "molecules", comprised of 26-types of atoms, which react on a surface (surface chemistry). For the history of this logic, read:
Eoht(dot)info, article: Human molecule
In the human, the deciding electron valencies that have important electronegativity preferences (needs) are the hydro-carbon atoms (fatty-acids) of the mind.
To study the "hotness" of a given human interaction, we must view the process as a chemical reaction between two or more molecules (people). Physical heats (body) are generally categorized as "enthalpic" factors, i.e. symmetry, averageness, complexion, etc., and neurological heats (mind) generally relate to "entropic" factors, i.e. organizational aspects. In the human chemical bond, a 5-to-1 ratio of attraction-to-repulsion tends to characterized long-term stable marriage bonds.
I'm a fan of your correlations between human interactions and science. I'm curious how you might evaluate something like "People Magazines Sexiest Man Alive." Are there certain reactions that are felt more prominently, or are more dominant in making a "hot" connection. What makes someone be attractive to one person and not to another? Or someone that is attractive to the majority of society.... Lots to think about. Thanks!
In short, as to the sexiest man alive, the statement signifies that, according to People magazine, more women alive would what to have sex with so-and-so man. In a chemical sense, such a man would be considered as a "highly activated" (reactive) chemical species; as compared to other inert species. It is like comparing an inert Nobel gas atom, such as Neon (Ne), with a highly reactive atom, such as oxygen (O); thus concluding that more atoms want to react (have sex with) oxygen than neon.
That makes sense... so a person could be considered an atom from the periodic table. That atom will bond to make its electron shell filled (unless it already is), and although there are plenty of atoms to bond, certain ones make more of a match like Lithium (Li) with Chloride (Cl) but it could also bond with Sulfur (S) but if that Lithium had its "choice" then its electronegativity would make it choose Cl. You're saying the same thing happens with people?
ssaloof 3 years ago
Yes, you're on the right path. In the human case, however, the model is scaled up, such that people are "molecules", comprised of 26-types of atoms, which react on a surface (surface chemistry). For the history of this logic, read:
Eoht(dot)info, article: Human molecule
In the human, the deciding electron valencies that have important electronegativity preferences (needs) are the hydro-carbon atoms (fatty-acids) of the mind.
HumanChemistry101 3 years ago
To study the "hotness" of a given human interaction, we must view the process as a chemical reaction between two or more molecules (people). Physical heats (body) are generally categorized as "enthalpic" factors, i.e. symmetry, averageness, complexion, etc., and neurological heats (mind) generally relate to "entropic" factors, i.e. organizational aspects. In the human chemical bond, a 5-to-1 ratio of attraction-to-repulsion tends to characterized long-term stable marriage bonds.
HumanChemistry101 3 years ago
I'm a fan of your correlations between human interactions and science. I'm curious how you might evaluate something like "People Magazines Sexiest Man Alive." Are there certain reactions that are felt more prominently, or are more dominant in making a "hot" connection. What makes someone be attractive to one person and not to another? Or someone that is attractive to the majority of society.... Lots to think about. Thanks!
ssaloof 3 years ago
In short, as to the sexiest man alive, the statement signifies that, according to People magazine, more women alive would what to have sex with so-and-so man. In a chemical sense, such a man would be considered as a "highly activated" (reactive) chemical species; as compared to other inert species. It is like comparing an inert Nobel gas atom, such as Neon (Ne), with a highly reactive atom, such as oxygen (O); thus concluding that more atoms want to react (have sex with) oxygen than neon.
HumanChemistry101 3 years ago