Log in

No account? Create an account
10 March 2003 @ 08:36 pm
A discussion on the nature of relationships and the variables involved therein  

We were trying to define the important elements of a relationship here.

****: Or communication, distance, depth of relationship.
****: How does this relate to us? Well, that's sort of unknown territory.
-the redhead-: mmmm - I don't think it's distance - I think it's time
****: Time as in relationship time or clock time?
-the redhead-: clock time
-the redhead-: well, yes relationship time too
****: As in "I've known -the redhead- for 2 years" as opposed to "-the redhead- and I have spent X time together"?
-the redhead-: but time is more important than distance, because we can (to a certain degree with the appropriate application of $$) make distance go away
****: Interesting point.
****: Close distance however allows more time.
****: (Thinking about *** here as an example)
-the redhead-: that should be can make the distance variable small enough to be manageable, give or take
-the redhead-: but you cannot shrink clock time
****: True, we do have a certain amount of clock time period.
****: /me believes "quality time" is a misnomer.
-the redhead-: and the importance of 'skin time', as it were, cannot....
****: *listening*
-the redhead-: so you can put distance in a plane and reduce it's... importance? impact?
****: hm...
-the redhead-: you cannot do the same with in person time
****: finish the sentence about skin time.
****: true, but you can't conquer distance for any length of time unless you move closer.
-the redhead-: you can ameliorate the effects of not having that time in person, esp. if those involved have actually have brains
****: This is true. And one of the reasons I enjoy chatting with you.
****: You've got a brain.
-the redhead-: they are linked, but the time is still more important than the distance
-the redhead-: distance is more variable, more easily conquered, and more compressible
****: I see your point.
-the redhead-: it's also relative to the people involved - I know people to whom a 2 hour drive is effectively the same as is a 4 hour flight to the east coast is for me
****: True. Technically you could be here in 4 hours.
****: And *** minutes to drive from *** to the house.
****: Time is also dependant on other commitments.
****: Distance is more dependant on commitments and resources.
****: IE: Money to get out on a plane, and ability to lock out commitments to set aside a block of time.
-the redhead-: mmm - I think time is more dependent upon other commitments, but distance is more dependent upon $$
****: Right, but it's hard to fly out for dinner.
****: And then back again.
-the redhead-: hence that time is less flexible than distance
****: Well, you *could*
****: But distance typically entails quanta of time.
****: conquering distance requires quanta of time.
-the redhead-: yes, but that time isn't on the same level (for some) as the time spent together
-the redhead-: argh - I need math to do this right
-the redhead-: or better words
****: I understand you.
****: It's an apt description. I see your point.


****: Discussing distance, relationships and the like.
****: Hoping it might jog a bit on what you're looking for.
-the redhead-: wonder if I could co a proof of this theory?
-the redhead-: *snort* I bet it'a already been done...
****: Possibly.
****: Why I look to things like game theory at times.
****: Seeking answers to questions.
-the redhead-: yes, but I still stick by my statement
-the redhead-: that game thoery is helpful, but humans have variables
****: yes, they do.
****: And the more I read, the more I realize that.
-the redhead-: that don't play well with zero and non-zero sum games
****: People also don't always play the rational solution.
****: I'll believe that, but it is a clue.
-the redhead-: it is a clue, but predictability only comes with a serious level of knowledge - and even then its not always right
****: True. But I like looking at things for clues. Books, papers, the entrails of a cow.
****: Even Larouche tracts can sometimes shed light upon the halls of ignorance.
****: When used as a firelighter.
-the redhead-: I have a shirt I got at Pensic
-the redhead-: it says, in Latin, 'If I wanted your opinion I would read your entrails'
-the redhead-: very few people get it
****: *laugh*
****: *cough* that is funny.
-the redhead-: it's appropriate on occasion
-the redhead-: tho I try to limit the disembowlings
-the redhead-: *grin*
-the redhead-: for example I would not wish to be held responsible for predicting what would happen if we *were* in the same place at the same time
-the redhead-: there's an associated , underlying binary component (or would be)
-the redhead-: but beyond that...?

Taken from an ongoing IM discussion - this may change.

-the redhead-

...struggling with terminology for the variables of the theory...