Ten and Inverse Relationships
I have a thing for inverse relationships. Which may also be known as "inverse correlations" but I wasn't so sure of the spelling on that, so we'll stick to the first one here.
Anyways, I'm not sure why I do--maybe it was all that time I spent in chemistry class in, what, 10th grade learning how to draw them, meticulously, by ruler. Maybe it's just that I'm contrary enough to like the idea of two variables tied together by moving in opposite directions of each other. I don't know exactly why, but they do give me that little tickle of OOH! whenever I figure one out.
Today, as I was out and about running errands, I discovered--possibly--another one. I have decided to call it the Ten's Inverse Law of Significant Texting. Which states, to wit:
1) If two people in a close relationship or just wanting to really get in touch about something desire to communicate with each other
2) One will text the other with high want and get low response
3) When the other does respond--with high want--they will, too, get low response.
In other words, if one checks their phone and finds the message "I really need to talk to you," and texts back ASAP, there is a damn good chance that other person will respond in a very casual manner. A slow-like-tortoise manner, if you will. A manner that seems to indicate that the words "really" and "need" in the first message were not, y'know, entirely being used with their denotative meanings.
I have observed this with my brother and his girlfriend--who spend a lot of time texting each other--as well as numerous times in mine own life. While the plural of anecdote is not data, it is a Law quite well in line with the general set of Murphy's, and so I think there's some potential to it.
Might need a better name than TILST, though.
Anyways, I'm not sure why I do--maybe it was all that time I spent in chemistry class in, what, 10th grade learning how to draw them, meticulously, by ruler. Maybe it's just that I'm contrary enough to like the idea of two variables tied together by moving in opposite directions of each other. I don't know exactly why, but they do give me that little tickle of OOH! whenever I figure one out.
Today, as I was out and about running errands, I discovered--possibly--another one. I have decided to call it the Ten's Inverse Law of Significant Texting. Which states, to wit:
1) If two people in a close relationship or just wanting to really get in touch about something desire to communicate with each other
2) One will text the other with high want and get low response
3) When the other does respond--with high want--they will, too, get low response.
In other words, if one checks their phone and finds the message "I really need to talk to you," and texts back ASAP, there is a damn good chance that other person will respond in a very casual manner. A slow-like-tortoise manner, if you will. A manner that seems to indicate that the words "really" and "need" in the first message were not, y'know, entirely being used with their denotative meanings.
I have observed this with my brother and his girlfriend--who spend a lot of time texting each other--as well as numerous times in mine own life. While the plural of anecdote is not data, it is a Law quite well in line with the general set of Murphy's, and so I think there's some potential to it.
Might need a better name than TILST, though.