## 8 February 2006

### Unless, of course, you're binomial

At what time of the day are you the most sexually responsive?

Here's the formula:

AL / T + 10 x AG / SF x G = TOTAL / 60 = sexiest time, where:
AL = Represent units of alcohol consumed each week
SF = sexual frequency per week
G = Gender ( Male - 2, Female - 1.5)
T = Sex time preference ( 1.5 - Mornings, 2 - Evenings)

Add or subtract your answer to or from 6am (e.g +11.75 means 4.45pm is the best time to hit the sack, if you scored -4, 2am is nookie time for you)

And so Samantha tried it, and this is what she got:

0/2 +10 x 30/3 x 1.5 = 150/60 = 2.5

So, since it's in the positive, I add two and a half hours to 6 am, and that means I need a visitor around 8:30 am.

I need hardly point out that if I try this, it violates a sacred rule of mathematics: the one about dividing by zero.

Posted at 6:16 AM to Table for One

Hmmm... Wonder what polynomials do with this... And does it also apply to "mono"-nomials? Or would that be "uni"-nomials?

Posted by: Winston at 6:58 AM on 8 February 2006

"SF = sexual frequency per week"

Define 'sexual'. For that matter define 'frequency' and 'week.' 'Per' is pretty self-explanitory.

Posted by: Bobbert at 9:24 AM on 8 February 2006

Nothing says you can't use your lifetime average. Or, if you remember calculus, you could take the limit of the function as SF approaches 0.

Interesting formula. I don't see any way to come up with a negative result. The "units of alcohol" term will only budge the result by half an hour or so, and that only if you're a lush.

What does it mean if my ideal time is always four and a half days from now?

Posted by: Michael Bates at 9:47 AM on 8 February 2006

So ideally I need some entertainment for my coffee break - but before lunch, which sounds very reasonable.

Now, if I were in the union...

Posted by: Tatyana at 10:27 AM on 8 February 2006

I didn't actually do the math: once I noticed I had a denominator of zero at some point, I had both my answer and the hook for the post.

Posted by: CGHill at 10:31 AM on 8 February 2006

Chaz, I understood this to be a hypothetical exercise.

Posted by: Tatyana at 9:12 AM on 10 February 2006

There's hypothetical and there's hypothetical, if you know what I mean.

I play an online stock-trading game which uses blogs as corporate entities. I built my original \$500 stake up to \$2.02 trillion, watched it crumble into dust, and have rebuilt back into the low billions. This is, of course, hypothetical.

But actual carnal activity? That's hypothetical.

Posted by: CGHill at 10:09 AM on 10 February 2006