Dick Hardt - Blame Canada - Harvard Math
Note: Updated from Blogger December 5, 2005
Dick Hardt has shown us a great example of Harvard math.
The conclusion, based on formulas sent to Dick by a friend, is that women = problems.
Here is my comment to that blog entry:
In this case I’m not sure we fully understood Dick’s actual problem - his initial focus was on recent developments in his romantic life.
If we say Romance (R) is the product of Woman (W) * Time (T) * Money (M) *, then
we have R = T * M * W
Clearly, if any of T, M or W is missing or is very small, then R will not be much to talk about either.
Einstein’s famous formula E = mc2 has showed that the energy of a system depends of how much ( m - mass) you put into it. Luckily for us with little time and little money, c2 is a very large constant and thus even putting a bit into a system should create a larger amount of energy.
In mathematical terms, if we say that even a little bit of time and money creates a fair bit of energy and that a measurement of romance is the energy created in the system, then we have E = T*M*W. Thus, in a case where T and/or M are small, I’m left to conclude that R (=E=T*M*W) really depends on the W (woman) and that time and money really have little to do with it.
Of course, there might be an error in my formula that requires further research by this forum. For example, it is interesting to note that even in cases where the
W(oman) is not really into the relationship, that T and M can still create R(omance) - as long as W is present and not negative.
roar at roarweb dot com