My experiments with Pick Up Science (Part - 1)

Abstract

This series of paper discusses four experiments on two different strategies of inducing attraction in humans. Incidentally, all the humans involved in this experiment were men and subjects were women, hence this paper presents may mislead the reader to skewed perspective of laws governing attraction among humans. I want to clarify that this paper discusses only 1 of 4 permutations (not combination because attraction is vector having direction) of attraction among normal species of humans.

Experiment 1 on passive disinterest

Experimenter : A, a male with handsomeness = 7/10 and conspicuousness = 3/10.
Subject: P, a female with beauty = 7.5/10 and conspicuousness of 2/10
Environment: Office. A and P are in different departments, no one deals with each other professionally. The probability of random interaction between the two is illustrated by the following equation:
P(x) = (1/number of employees) * (time when they are drunk/time they stay in company)


Procedure

Day 1: A adds P on company chat engine. ( active interest ? )
Day 4: P accepts chat engine request.
Day 7: Conversation begins

P: As stupid it may sound asking you, but as far as I remember we have never talked, met or interacted before. May I know why did I you add me as a friend on the chat engine ?
A: I had some work in HR deptt., so I added you, but now that is resolved. You may not worry about it.
P: I am not in HR deptt., I am in Resource development.
A: Oh! I thought both are the same, anyway "Resource" is common.
P: No, Resource Development deals with developing resource, HR deals with exploiting it.
A: ok, i can't understand a word you are saying.
P: So, how come you know my name ?
A: I was going through HR area, somehow your name stuck with me. I believed anyone who sits in HR area must be an HR.
P: You read my nameplate ?
A: I heard someone calling you ....
P: lolz, strange that you remembered only my name.
A: Sorry for all the trouble that I may have caused, please feel free to delete me.
P: no, no, I didn't mean that

Post this interesting conversation there have been a few friendly and unfriendly exchange between A and P.

Analysis:

In the above mentioned experiment, A violates all the principles laid down the literature so far by pioneers like Mystery, Ross Jeffries . 3-second rule, first demonstrate value rule, active disinterest strategy are only a few of the principles being violated. Still A is not only able to open up P, but also produce a mild attraction towards himself. In spite of the deviation from conventional strategies a few patterns must be observed.

1. Initial, addition on chat engine and inactivity by A for 3 days looks similar to activeness followed by disinterest. Mixed signals.
   
2. It must be noted that A was successfully able to avoid a barrage of questions from P, thus demonstrating his smartness hence value. Such a demonstration of value was sufficient enough to hold the final push "feel free to delete me". Pull-push theory.
   

Conclusion

Although the experiment do not complies with most of the strategies documented in the literature so far, it do contains some identifiable patterns which further strengthen the efficacy of those patterns especially Push-pull pattern. Having said that it must be noted (as it will be demonstrated in next papers) that this pattern is too difficult to repeat and is largely subjective to the subject as well as experimenter.