what shape is a relationship?

[McFluff]

i didn't know what thread to put this into, so sorry if i've offended anyone by sticking it in here

I just had a strange logical thought.......very unusul from the normal weirdness that is my mind.

Relationships are U shaped.
at the start, the relationship is fresh and new, and at the top of one side of the U. The U represents the togetherness of the relationship. with the bottom of the U being complete togetherness.

As the relationship continues, so we continue down the side of the U, geting closer and closer to being happiest at the bottom of the U........lets call it the 'comfort zone'

The time spent upon reaching the comfort zone, varies from relationship to relationship, some may spend their whole lives there being completly happy and content with what they have. others may strive for more..........which starts the next stage of the U

The other side of the U...the upward side, is harder to climb than the downward slide that was the start of the relationship.
But you can reach th top of the U, and be back where you started with perseverance if something isn't right.

However some people aren't strong enough to climb the U, and o get stuck in an uncomfortable limbo in he bottom of the U vaguely rocking from side to side and looking a bit bemused.

sometimes a person can be booted from the U.
If another person slides down the slope into the U, the person on the other side wll be richocheted up and out of the other side, so again we have two people in the centre.

Also they can just be firmly kicked out by the other person in the U.

Ok this makes no sense.............except to me, but i'm just me, and i dont expect anyoneto understand me fully!!!!!!

sorry about the length of this, but i just had to get it out of my system!

[Animal]

Yeah, i kinda get what ur meaning, but personally I think relationships are W shaped, with loadsa ups and downs and bits to climb. But hey, us animals are prob v different. :lol:

[McFluff]

theres lots of differnt size and shapes of Us, with different length sides, and differnt degress of slopiness!!

[Animal]

Aaaaaah! I see. I think...???

*scratches head*

[McFluff]

some of the Us rock about as well, thus creating bumps and little hilss in the middle of the main U

i sholud really go to bed before my mind blows!!!!

[Animal]

See as I thot, the little hills turn the U's into W's!!!

[McFluff]

ok.......you win

<climbs down off throne of intellect>
<hands over crown>
<runs into corner and crouches in a whimpering ball>

I bow to you OH GREAT ONE

[Boogie Man]

I think you're all nuts. S is the shape of the relationship ya big silly's.

[Animal]

I accept my crown with great pride.

All hail King Kevin-Animal.:D :D :D

[relliott]

surely U shape means all relationships must end before another begins? I would like to suggest a mobius strip as the shape of a relationship (the neverending figure of eight shaped thingy)

reasons:
1) it is made up of twists and turns
2) it has no definable beginning and the end of one blends on into the rest of life
3) some people yo-yo from one person to another and so are in a way in a never-ending relationship
4) even when someone dies the memory remains, and so the relationship lives on in spirit. (I hate the first guy I went out with, but I still think about him sometimes... and my last relationship didn't work out coz the guy hasn't got over the death of his wife.. and before you ask, he got married really young, so no I wasn't dating someone twice my age!)

[Hayley]

Hmmm...

I'm not sure what shape I think relationships are. I guess it depends on the kind of relationship and the individuals involved.

Some are like lines - short, straightforward and perhaps even dull.
Some are like circles, tediously going round and round.
Some are like - as Ruth said - that infinity symbol thingy - neverending, full of twists and turns.

And some have no shape at all and are just a big squiggly mess -
crossing over at many places but always going in a different direction.

Personally - I'd go for a Pumpkin-shaped one! :lol

:confused:

[phlangepal]

relationships are any shape you want them to be. They take alot of work but its great fun all round. Having had two very serious relationships myself all I can say is bring on the third! And as for one relationship having to end b4 another begins then just wait and see cause that aint the way the world works.

[frances]

wow- what an interesting subject.
i've been going through the alphabet looking at what each letter would stand for in a relationship- some interesting ones-
A started off together but went in diff. directions. then something linked them together for a bit but they really weren't meant to be together/work out, so they parted.
couldn't explain "X" though.

what's the difference between "V" and "U"?
i'm just going on about something and nothing -ignore me!

[elliottsimpson]

then presumably its shape is amorphous - no?

[frances]

perhaps, i'm not sure. but if it's not a shape then what is it like? perhaps we are not supposed to know the answer, maybe we should just take relationships for what they are. i think that humans tend to like to link things up with another idea so that they can try to understand it.
what i do know is that each relationship is different, because different people bring different things into that relationship, for better or worse.

[Hayley]

X - could that be like "star cross'd lover's"? No - I don't think Romeo and Juliette were X shaped.

I've got it - X is not a relationship as such but more of an encounter - their life paths cross once - and they never meet again...

'Strangers in the night,
Exchanging glances...'

[Animal]

Were Romeo and juliette not star crossed lovers then?? What about Dirty Den and Angie then?:lol :lol :lol

[relliott]

my relationships are all kinds of shapes

currently now back with the guy I spli twith 8 months ago after in the mean time seeing his workmate......... very weird things going on

[elliottsimpson]

so is that sort of boomerang shaped?

[Animal]

But what about peeps who end up getting married and stay tpgether forever. Is their relationship O shaped- never ending.
(i dont suppose peeps would have to be married for an ongoing relationship, It was just an example)

[Dexter]

Right.... well here's my contribution to this evidently interesting thread!....

I've been following all of your wacky explanations of relationship shapes and began to consider the mathematical applications in this topic (as i always seem to do :lol)....

I therefore constructed the following theorem......
"Dexter's multirelationship theorem!"....

Relationships come in many forms and i think the following four graphs provide very generalised representations of most relationships......


Relationship No. 1:

http://mysite.freeserve.com/nirvanarain/yx.gif

y = x

The "start off from nowhere and proceed at a constant rate to become better till the end" relationship....


Relationship No. 2:

http://mysite.freeserve.com/nirvanarain/yx2.gif

y = x^2

Though this one may seem ill-explained.... it does make a great deal of sense... honest!....
This is the relationship that starts off well (at the negative values), meets its low point half way through but picks up and returns to it's former glory... living happily ever after!...


Relationship No. 3:

http://mysite.freeserve.com/nirvanarain/minusyx2.gif

y = -x^2

Quite the converse to the previous one, the "y = -x^2" relationship starts off badly, appears to be going somewhere (at x = 0) then fizzles out to nothing (ends as it started)...

Relationship No. 4:

http://mysite.freeserve.com/nirvanarain/ypi.gif

y=3.14159265358979323846264... (OR (y = pi))

In my opinion, this is the most interesting and fundamentally secure relationship....

Starting at an undefined value (on a high) - like pi - and continuing at this level to infinity. This is the relationship which has the strongest foundations and inevitably has greatest security.... an everlasting relationship if you like!

In conclusion.... relationships possess a rather obscure mathematical perspective!.... really!... they do!....





Dexter.

[Adam]

*shakes head slowly*

you are so sad.

[MartinC]

y=pi might prove to be "the most secure" relationship, if it was ever possible that it could exist...........but since emotions, thoughts and interactions between people are never static, nor could be any relationship in existance between them........hence - a MATHEMATICAL COLLOQUISM! :lol

QED!

[Adam]

sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad sad

[MartinC]

u know.........ud really make a great salesman........

[Adam]

screw medicine. used cars thats what IM talkin about, yeah.

[MartinC]

quite

[Dexter]

Emotions, thoughts and interactions?..... The shape of a relationship merely plots the highs and lows it experiences over time....

Such factors, though important in their own right, are not displayed on the graph of a relationship!..... We can see, for example, in the y=x^2 graph, that a relationship can have it's low point/s but by the end recovers to its previous high....

Emotions are evidently not displayed in this graph since they are -as you have said - merely interactions between the people in the relationship....... certainly..... they have an influence on the graph's shape, but fail to disprove my graphical representation of a relationship!....

You are right in saying that relationships are not static..... this very point i feel is made in each of the graphs..... with the exception of y=pi (the ideal relationship)..... all of the graphs show individual fluctuations expressed in a relationship!....

Of course, the graphs are very generalised... on looking at the graphs accompanying my post, the lines appear very straight and precise!..... however.... if you consider the pixels from which the pictures are made, it can be understood that each line is distorted and does not possess the precision that would at first seem evident!....

Hence, Dexter's multirelationship theorem does possess a ring of truth in it....
As i said previously, the graphs need close inspection in order to understand and appreciate my - possibly sad - theory.. however ludicrous it may appear at face value!


Apologies for boring anyone to death there!.... just thought i would elaborate on my clearly ill-explained theorem!...




Dexter.

[Adam]

gah!
sad sad sad
heres a suggestion- get rid of the graphs, and get a life.

[Dexter]

"O!, beware, my lord, of Jealousy
It is the green eyed monster
Which doth mock the meat it feeds on."

- "Othello" - Shakespeare...


Here's a suggestion to you: If you have nothing positive, or worthwhile to add to this thread.... kindly take your leave!....

Your comments - undignified...
Your hostility - unbecoming of a future doctor!...

However, I do wish you well sir!

...

"I grow; I prosper"

:lol :evil :lol

[Adam]

dexter. if u dont want slapped like a *****, then stop acting like a *****

[Devlinator]

Has everybody went away for a couple of weeks and started eating quotation dictionaries or something, cos you're all quoting an awful lot.

[Adam Gilmour]

Ok I just caught up with this thread quite interesting I really should start readign these more often. The best letter to describe a relationship is probably M. Coz you can't go wrong with a bit of Mmmmmmmmmm............... :lol ;) :lol


Adam

[Devlinator]

you always have to go for the LCD dont u. But hey if it works who am i to complain 2u!

[Adam Gilmour]

LCD??? As in Liquid Crystal Display??? You've lost me! :confused:

[DScollon]

:lol I think she means Lowest Common Denominator Adam.

[elliottsimpson]

there again - the amount of gel on Adam G's hair - maybe would work as a liquid crystal display!

:lol :lol :lol :lol

[relliott]

ouch!

[Devlinator]

I'll let you decide what it is that i decide, it could be one of lifes great mysteries!

[Adam Gilmour]

:lol :lol :lol Well I can always give it a try Elliott and what can I say I did higher computing and that is the recognised term for LCD. :p

[elliottsimpson]

so we made do with higher maths (the only higher I got an "A" for - the very first year they attached letters to the highers) and it was lowest common denominator (not "administrator" as i saw in a letter, once). The other term is "highest common multiplier" BTW - not a lot of people know that.

[Adam Gilmour]

Originally posted by elliottsimpson
BTW - not a lot of people know that.

I didn't but I do now!!! :D

[Gary T]

did any1 else think that the lowest common denomonator woz the easiest part of ah maths???

[Devlinator]

As in the mad series thing that you did? Cant remeber the name of it, but know what you mean, but i dont think it was the easiest bit, number bases was much easier, well in my opinion anyway!

[Gary T]

number bases??? (scratches head) all i can remember now is that there woz sumfin which involved remainders!!!

[Devlinator]

yeah, you continually divide by the base and write the remainders at the side, when you get to the end you read from the bottom up, and you have your number in that number base, you can do all sorts of stuff with it, but its main application is computer programmes, and computation, its all binary!

[Gary T]

dont remind me.... i woz stupid enuf 2 apply 4 a course involvin computers!!!! (note 2 self... neva eva work wif computers!!!!)

[Devlinator]

That should be interesting for you then gary!

[Gary T]

well afta havin ma 1st computer crash last sunday im beginnin 2 regret it b4 i have even started ma course!!!:cry: :cry: