Customer Reviews

Mathematics and Sex

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I bought this book because of an earlier review that complained about no explanation of the formulae. I was hoping that what that really meant is that it was filled with good math and was in depth. Unfortunately, it isn't.

There are some of the chapters that I found very interesting, such as the chapter on attraction cycles. There are other chapters that were really just fluff. Some quick references to some research, and some silly insinuations about the author's bar hopping experiences or lack thereof.

I liked that the book took a number of concepts and translated them to references to mathematics papers.

I disliked that there was not enough math. Formulas are presented without defining any of the terms. So you might be told that an attraction cycle is represented by f(x)= R(x) + a*B(x). But there is no definition of the R function, how the a constant is derived, or the B function. Nor is there a discussion, usually, of the research that went on to define the function and alternatives examined. The book would benefit very much from going into a full definition of the functions, even if it were in an appendix. Instead, you get a little bit of a tease but not enough information to understand.

Likewise, there are cases where the mathematical focus would benefit from a discussion of computer science or engineering techniques. For example, the author describes the complexity of how a dating service might perform similarity matches. She readily admits that she doesn't know what they actually do, so conjectures, makes some references to multidimensional analysis, and more or less leaves it at that. Such a chapter would benefit from a discussion of Bayesian networks, cluster analysis, or other techniques that are common in the computer world as ways to deal with the particular issue.

Although I have not yet finished reading the book, I find that I am starting to skim, which is never a great sign. I'm getting the feeling that the author dug into a few of the topics, but then added a number of chapters to flesh out the table of contents. I will finish the book, but I'm finding that I'm much more interested in the next book on my list. (The Machine That Changed The World)

Yes, I agree with the previous reviewers that this book is an informative light hearted romp through the world of mathematical

modelling of one of biology's most important topics: sex. But, I am giving this book only 3 stars since I find it very irritating to be fed with mathematical equations where no attempt has ever been made to explain the various variables or even a rudimentary explanation. This is just plain show and very very detracting!

Here is some math for customers considering this book. There are 7 reviews preceeding mine. 5 are right. 2 are wrong.

The reviews that are right have noticed that the book contains no math. The reviews that are wrong have noticed that the book is vaguely about sex. Actually it's not. It's about the difficulty difficulty some academics have in starting a sentence and completing it on the same topic.

The trouble with invoking applied mathematics is that you have to support what you're saying. Therefore when offering an equation or formula you traditionally state what the variables stand for.

I assume that the author has this information but finds it difficult to restate in common English. Almost every topic is concluded in this drift: "Well it would be much too time consuming to explain what this formula means but isn't it nice to know that it exists?"

No. I mean it would be, but we don't know that the formula does exist (hapless readers that we are). To convince us, you have to explain it. Explain: which means state clearly and describe how it works.

Here's an example, misanthropically quoted by MSN this morning.

If you are looking for a mate for life the correct formula is to

go out with 12 people and then choose the next best one after that, which seems to mean better than number 11 but not necessarily as good as number 12. Yes, just ducky, but why is that true?: Sorry, explanation time is over. Exam will be at the sports bar on Saturday night. Don't blow it.

Now look: does this "formula" stand up on its own two feet or is it also drunk and falling off its barstool? Does it still count if all 12 of them dumped YOU? Suppose they were all alcoholics, or verbally abusive? Suppose your relationship with each lasted only three days? Suppose, less dramatically, that following the normal psychological model, you simply picked the same "type" every time? Do you actually have enough information to proceed or should you still see a lawyer about pre-nups. And why 12? Why not 30 or the square root of 17?

Perhaps the author was afraid that if she actually explained herself clearly her readers would spend so much time working out the fractals between margaritas that they'd never go home with anyone. She should ease her mind and write the book correctly. No one is going to take her conclusions to the field. The subject is interesting as theory. And it is interesting. I just wish the author had taken advantage of the fact.

How do you make maths sexy? Write a book about maths and sex! Trouble is, this book doesn't quite work. If you are already heavily immersed in maths and mathematical modelling, then here are some thought-provoking models that can amusingly be applied to sex. However, anyone unmathematical will see this as simply turning life experiences into a set of gobbledygook equations that add nothing to understanding, and reinforce lots of negative stereotypes about geeky maths.

The author writes rather too often about her sexual past, her personal views on orgasm, etc. It would have been better if she'd avoided personalising it altogether. Maybe she thought personal sex/relationship anecdotes would be funny, but if so, it didn't work with this reader.

Very much for the non-mathematician (there is nothing requiring any mathematical skill, just interest) this well written and entertaining book demonstrates the ability of incredibly simple models to capture extremely interesting behaviour, and comments wryly on such imprtant issues ;-) as how many people one should date before settling on "the right one".

Clio Cresswell, Mathematics and Sex (Allen and Unwin, 2004)

One doesn't usually think about the terms "mathematics" and "sex" going together. Clio Cresswell is out to change that perception, and her attempt here is a witty, albeit slightly shallow, little book that's definitely worth a look if you enjoy either mathematics or sex (and are there really people out there who enjoy neither?).

Cresswell's approach to the topic is to treat readers like laypersons, which is much appreciated by those of us who are somewhat innumerate. Cresswell dedicates each of the book's chapters to one particular aspect of the dating and mating ritual and expounds upon current mathematical hypotheses that attempt to explain why we do the things we do. Perversely, if there is a failing to this approach, it's that Cresswell sometimes treats us a bit too much like laypersons; some more detail on how the equations scientists have come up with work would have been nice.

Still, it's a game try, and a fun one, worth reading. ***

I don't know why people are complaining about no math in this book. All the topics are well referenced at the back.

This inexpensive book is light reading, entertaining, highly thought provoking and shows the way forword for those who want more details. And it is pretty cheap too.

I [heart] Ms. Cresswell's premise: relationships and sex are approachable through mathematics. However, her approach leaves me either wanting more mathematics or a more formal voice. She doesn't skimp on the formulaic jargon, but does skimp on its explanation. You're teasing us Clio! Don't be so coy. If you're going to show us the nuts and bolts of how math can uncover the secrets of relationships and sex, then show us the full monty, and give me the details. Need the info. Yeah. Anyway, the "number of 'bonks' to successful pair bonding" tip is worth the price of admission alone but there are other insightful and perhaps instructional tips hidden in this work as well.

How can a book with a title like this not attract your attention? Why thig might even be interesting enough to attract the attention of the most jaded high schooler.

In Clio Cresswell's view, mathematics is the study of patterns. And boy are patterns a part of sex. How many of us have married the same woman several times - different skins, same insides? What are the probablilities? How do you express this in an equasion.

The writing style is wonderful. Here's the start of Chapter 7 -- Have you ever found yourself wishing there was another sex? "Maybe you have secretly wished for a sex with a penis that would cry with you at the movies, or a sex with breasts that would find copious beer drining the greatest turn-on since Elvis." It goes on to talk about the mathematics of having three sexes. "Just think how hard it is to pick up already in our set up. Imagine if you had to pick up two people each time. You would hardly ever get laid."

A wonderful view of applied mathematics.

Good book. Never thought of the subject in that way before, however it was very interesting reading.