Marriage counseling is so 20th century. The 21st century may belong to relationship neuroinformaticians because they can create a mathematical model for efficient communication in your love life.
The dynamics of love can look like a sine wave, with smooth, repetitive highs and lows. That's probably not too bad. We certainly try for a flat line but that is difficult to achieve. What you want to avoid is having your other half begin to vibrate weirdly. When that happens, couples oscillate without any harmony, the waves go out of control and soon you are forced to get back down to dating weight.
Steven Strogatz first described romance with a dynamical system in 1988. He constructed a 2-D model describing two hypothetical partners that interact emotionally. The well known example he used was Romeo and Juliet during their short, tumultuous affair. As everyone knows, a bunch of murders and suicides in a few days time are not indicative of a harmonious teenage relationship. It was not an elegant sinusoid.
But, note Natalia Bielczyk and colleagues from Radboud University Nijmegen, a Strogatz model doesn't include delays in the partner responses to each other, so they added reactivity parameters: Personal history of the couple, their ‘past’, and reactivity to their partner and his/her history. With those parameters, more complex relationships can be modeled. Some are predictably doomed to fail while others are always stable. Stability occurs when both partners reach a stable level of satisfaction and the sine wave narrows or even disappears.
They even say that delays in reactivity can bring stability to couples that are originally unstable. Relationship counseling using the function sine. That's practical math.
Romeo and Juliet's vaguely weird relationship - the math. Romeo is in solid lines and Juliet is dashed. The tau (τ) above the individual figures indicates the delay in reactivity. As this shows, delays that are too short (<0.83) cause instability but so do delays that are too long (>2.364). Delays in the range of 0.83 - 2.364 cause stability for the young lovers but outside that and a whole bunch of people die. And you thought your teenage years were dramatic. Credit: Radboud University Nijmegen
The results are pretty intuitive though nothing you didn't already know - responses that are too delayed, or even too prompt, are a sign (get it??) of trouble. Under a certain threshold, delays mean instability and above it is stability. Hey, it isn't perfect. It takes a modern robot 25 minutes to fold a towel but based on that Ray Kurzweil says we will ascend into robot overlords by 2045 so I can believe we will model romance numerically long before that.
Why is numerical modeling going to be better for men? Because a range is optimal, and anything too fast causes instability, the math can tell you how lazy you can be in a relationship yet still claim you are working on maintaining a healthy response rate. Covertly. You are doing it for her.
But don't get cocky. You can't just mimic her moods and think your super-fast emotional reactivity to her ups and downs will allow you to watch the big game on Sunday without a conversation about 'us' and 'the relationship'. Suspiciously fast reactivity also leads to destabilization because you won't have allowed enough time for those compound emotions to form. She'll see right through it, without ever touching a calculator.
Social psychology is awesome. Talking, monitoring emotional levels and picking the right moment can take the place of trying to change the other person, which hasn't actually worked in a million years.
Citation: Natalia Bielczyk, Marek Bodnar, Urszula Foryś, 'Delay can stabilize: Love affairs dynamics', Applied Mathematics and Computation http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2012.10.028
- PHYSICAL SCIENCES
- EARTH SCIENCES
- LIFE SCIENCES
- SOCIAL SCIENCES
Subscribe to the newsletter
Stay in touch with the scientific world!
Know Science And Want To Write?
- Greenpeace Says Its GMOs Are Better Than Science's GMOs, Still Hates Golden Rice
- Reduce Prostate Cancer Risk By Sleeping With Lots Of Women - But Not Men
- Supersonic Laser-Propelled Aircraft Get A Step Closer
- Homo Floresiensis: Hobbit Species Continues To Provoke Questions About Human Evolution
- Okay With Disgusting Images? You Vote This Way 95 Percent Of The Time
- Everyone Hates Daylight Savings Time - But It Might Improve Public Health
- This Mid-Term Election Can Have Evolutionary Consequences
- "The problem is, American agricultural science cannot be adopted world-wide for the simple reason..."
- "You're quote mining. When it comes to environmental risk, energy emissions from CO2 are back at..."
- "Of course they aren't. These are scientific terms Hank Campbell and you can't just interpret them..."
- "The wealthiest are only formally most educated and, from both my personal expriences and reading..."
- "You think the marker assisted selection suddenly being endorsed by Greenpeace is not genetic modification..."
- Genetically modified clean energy from bacteria
- Designer babies: You can screen for cystic fibrosis but intelligence is a way off
- Science as profane: What superstition of 1752 and 2014 share in common
- What’s so “natural” about “natural crop breeding”?
- Worried you have cancer? Take a Google pill!
- Mars bars for brain health? Not so fast