Can Beauty be described in terms of mathematics?

In light of all the "fruitful"

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

discussions we've been having, I would like to introduce a more intriguing subject, the subject of beauty.

Perhaps this belongs in Human Sciences, but that section is full of homo stuff. Besides, it involves maths (somewhat), and of course the Phys & Maths users are most interesting and most qualified to discuss it.



This is Dr. Stephen Marquadt.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

When he was a young child, his mother was horribly disfigured in a car crash. So he eventually took the route of becoming a reconstructive plastic surgeon.
As a plastic surgeon, he had to work out a method of making his patients beautiful again.

This led to his claim to fame, the Golden Ratio Mask, as can be seen in my profile. He constructed it based on the Golden Ratio.




Throughout the ages, the golden ratio has fascinated both the ancient Greeks and Renaissance men. Marquadt said he was inspired by Da Vinci, who spent a great deal of time analyzing the human body and its beauty.

The golden ratio also appears in golden spirals and in a regular pentagram.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

A recurring idea is that beauty can be seen in objects where the golden ratio is expressed. Examples include the Parthenon, sculptures and even seashells. (From Disney's Donald in Mathmagic Land, a pretty cool cartoon)

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Based on this idea, the Golden Ratio Mask was constructed. According to Marquadt, any face that fits the mask will be considered beautiful.

Here's a video of Marquadt on John Cleese's The Human Face. (skip to 2:07)

[video=youtube_share;E1kqMk3jFD8]http://youtu.be/E1kqMk3jFD8?t=2m7s[/video]



continued (ends at 2:32)

[video=youtube;5pRJtjlHj_M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pRJtjlHj_M[/video]

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So the basic principle is that all beautiful faces have something in common, following a certain geometrical template. Whereas ugly faces are all distortions of the beautiful template.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Some claim the mask is best suited for Caucasians. But it still works out quite well.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Lastly, this Youtuber has done reconstructive Photoshop surgery on some girl's photo. I think the end result speaks for itself.

[video=youtube;N4fUjzqCC-8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=SG&v=N4fUjzqCC-8&hl=en-GB[/video]


So what do you guys think? Can beauty be reduced to a mathematical abstraction and can this be explained? Or does beauty still lie within the purview of our conundrums of philosophy?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Why do you wanna discuss beauty, of all things? Can't you find something better to do?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Everything physical can be described by mathematical formulas, because everything that we can apprehend with our sense is made up of the same stuff that gave rise to our physical being and which our senses developed to exploit. Human perception is about pattern, proportion, symmetry, etc, which allows us to identify food and threat, mates and rivals.

So, go ahead and describe it, in any terms you like. Mathematics will be useful to the artificial intelligences who didn't evolve in the same environment and need a handle on the experience they can't share.

 

Artificial intelligence?

 

Computers, androids, cyborgs: entities that haven't the biological basis for the recognition of beauty.

 

You could describe the physical parameters of what people think is beautiful on a statistical basis, but you cannot describe a formula for beauty that works for everyone everywhere.

 

well at this stage I'm just referring to humans.

So the Golden ratio mask is just a statistical approach? It does seem to work though.

 

the math is easy

Hot=10
not hot=0

not hot+3shots=I would accept a HJ
kinda hot+ 3shots=hot -come to my van

 

What for? Humans don't require a mathematical description of beauty: they know it when they see it. If they can't see, the formulas won't mean anything to them, as they perceive beauty in other forms, with other senses.

 

But as Stephen Marquadt said, he's a plastic surgeon, and just "knowing it when he sees it" won't work for him.
Besides, aren't you interested to learn more about how you perceive beauty, or appreciate a good piece of music?

 

Quick note: Nobody has yet mentioned height, weight or "measurements" when considering beauty.

If I say this math describes a woman

Height: 5 ft 9 inch Weight: 115 lbs Measurements: 36-26-37 people pay attention. We know she is likely attractive in body.

If I say

Height: 4 ft 11 inch Weight: 187 lbs Measurements: 42-35-43 then she sounds like she is not quite as lovely.

Height is likely less of a concern if proportionate, although studies show women prefer men taller and men prefer women shorter.

 

Not really. Actually, i weary rather quickly of people who claim a special expertise in perceptions we all have; who presume to tell me how i ought to perceive beauty in women, or appreciate paintings or listen to music.

 

Actually I prefer tall women, like models. But yes, thanks for bringing this up.

If you see the above images, a beautiful body should follow golden ratio proportions.

Maybe not hearing from the experts, but trying to understand oneself?

 

It's because of plastic surgeons and celebrity culture that you can no longer tell in a movie which actress is playing the mother, the daughter, the adulteress, the con artist - they've all been snipped and tucked into a tedious, uniform, artificial perfection. I have studied aesthetics; have an idea how symmetry and proportion work. But that's not the whole of beauty, as beauty is not the whole of attraction or of art.

 

A lot of writers in theoretical physics say that their goal is to find one small and beautiful equation that could describe everything in a thoery of everything. They don't know if this is truely possible, but to me sounds more like a day dream. Then even if anyone did come up with such a theory then people like alphanumeric would get their filthy hands all over it and junk it all up with a ton of useless mathmatics because it wasn't complicated enough and would have to be some equation that only a simpleton would use or reject it altogether because it was too simple and everyone knows that Ph.D level mathmatics have to be more complicated in ways that nobody could possibly understand.

On another note, I saw some scientist on the discovery channel once saying that people find faces to be attractive that have avearage facial features. If they took the avearage size of every feature and then put them all on one face then it would look like an attractive person. This seems to make sense because then they wouldn't have unordinary features. Then I have come to realize that some of the most attractive woman don't really have any prodominant features, but they can still be attractive with features that are not the perfect avearage if it suits the rest of their features. Then I have come to realize that I have all avearage facial features, so then that means that to the opposite sex that I am good looking. This is actual science!

 

Haha. You could be a comedian. Actually, some concepts in theoretical physics don't involve overly-complex math, such as Cabibbo angles.
And don't blame Alpha. Everyone knows the equation junkie around here is rpenner.
But just because you don't understand the math doesn't mean its useless. rpenner is always thinking at a higher level than most of us.

So you're more average than average?

You say you're attractive, now its time to verify using experiment. Hopefully it will end with a "practical experiment".

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I'm referring more to the mathematical aspect. About this golden ratio thing. Besides, I find it curious that the woman became much more beautiful after following the golden ratio mask.

 

It is an experiment I have repeated many times. I would go to bars and try to talk to woman, and then they always become overwhelmed by my dashing good looks. They quickly take a defensive posture, and then say something that gives a reason why we cannot be together. I would not even have to ask or imply anything that I am trying to sleep with them. It may only take something as suttle as a hello, or excuse me I need to get by. They will even try to avoid any eye contact or acknowledgement that they even notice me, but then I can catch them time to time looking at me when I am not paying attention to them. I think the main reason for this is because when they take one look at me they immediatly start thinking about sex, and why they should try as hard as they can to not have sex with someone at a bar. Trust me, good looks such as mine is a curse. They take one look at me, and immediatly think that any interaction between me and them could only lead to one thing. Allas, I could never get to know any stanger, or end up with a good woman that I don't know already. The only way to get past these defensive barriers is not being attractive. Then if it ever happens that I do involve myself in conversation with them, they get so turned out they always end up having to go to the bathroom and then I end up losing them.

 

(My underlined, above) .. Amen to that !

Generally;

Sure symetry is good - in faces too. But I've known some folk whose faces clearly wouldn't fit the blueprint and who nonetheless had most interesting and attractive faces.