New scientific discovery: The hypothetical attractiveness of a woman increases exponentially as her skirt:boot ratio approaches zero. Nobel Prize in my future?
You must be Logged in to post a comment
I believe you have failed to account for the occasion of an infinitely long skirt paired with infinitely long boots. Your hypothesis would indicate that this would be an infinitely attractive woman. However, an infinitely long skirt would more likely indicate the presence of cankles.
No...this would approach 1, not 0. Approaching 0 means having a skirt length that approaches 0 and a boot length that approaches infinity.
Unless the boot length is approaching infinty at a greater rate than skirt length. Comparing infinity to infinity when using physical measurements such as boot/skirt length would have an even more infinitesimal chance of being equal so as to be negligible.
L'hopital's rule bitch.
Lengths of clothing are physical measurements, not functions. Therefore L'Hôpital wouldn't apply. Nice try, though.
Le Chatelier's principle bitch.
And how might a length of clothing approach infinity?
Yeah but the boot length can't reach infinity, it has a limit (length of legs), so there is no way for it to be considerably greater than the skirt length unless the skirt length is very short.
Unfortunately, they do NOT give out Nobel Prizes for mathematical discoveries. This is because Nobel's wife had a lover, who was a mathematician, so Nobel took it out on all of them. True story.
At first glance I thought it read skirt to BOOB ratio...ie as skirt size approaches zero and boob size approaches infinity hotness increases exponentially
But the graph of boob size vs hotness is similar to the graph of water temperature vs density. With the 4 degrees Celsius mark being somewhere around DD's\n\ntl;dr: Huge ass boobs that sag to her feet are not hot.
Wow. This post really brought out all the nerds...
Yes! Hell, if Obama got one then you should too.
Genius. Pure genius.
To everyone who says this is wrong. Can't we all agree that if there is a ratio of 0:0 then there must be no skirt or boots. Implying that she is naked. And we all have to agree that if she's naked she is hot
Keith can you try a different Seinfeld quote??
Unless those boots are uggs. In which case they could never be attractive.
Alfred Nobel NEVER married. However, he did have a mistress, a Viennese woman named Sophie Hess but there was never any proof she had an affair with a mathematician or anyone else for that matter.
No that is not a new discovery, that one has been around since empire records
This vagina is making me thirsty!
What this poster doesn't know is that this mathematical relationship has already been discovered and documented: It is known as Zettai Ryouiki (Absolute Territory) and you can read about it here: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ZettaiRyouiki
I come here to get *away* from tvtropes links. Why would you throw that at the innocent and unsuspecting??
Those pretzels are making Keith thirsty!
Attack of the nerds!?!?!? Hahahahhah biattttcchhhes
did everyone forget about white pants?
Sorry bro. Japan already figured this out years ago, they have a name for it and everything.
@mayorbee:genius. Pure genius.
Hahaha, you're not gettin' any!\n\nForget that Nobel thing, too.
I think Iwasbored stated it perfectly...he's the one that deserves the Nobel prize
Wasn't this on how I meet your mother?
Hmmm quite interesting. I will have to experiment.
That's brillance. Keith your ridiculous
No he isn't.... Keith is my favorite! He is more entertaining than most of the texts!
I'm not sure I understand this... if the hypothesis is stating that attractiveness increases as boot length and skirt length become more similar (as mayorbee implies), then the ratio should approach one, not zero (1:1 being the most similar). If the hypothesis is stating that attractiveness increases as boot length increases and skirt length decreases, then I understand, since the ratio would approach zero (0:infinity). Therefore to maximize attractiveness, wear the longest bo
He's saying that long boots + short skirt = attractive. that's why its approaching 0.
so according to your theory only the skirt to boot ratio relates to hotness... even if she were to have the ability to eat an apple through a chain link fence and have her fupa falling out of her skirt and on top of her boots... more than boot:skirt ratio needs to be accounted for
your either a nerd or too high. who compares math to women?
These Pretzels are making me thirsty!
No one, no one at all
Do those who walk about skirt-less and boot-less still count as attractive in this case?
nine 1 three 2 six 9 eight 3 three 6\nAsk for Tyler