The systems of equations written on these lovely physics students’ backs appear complex enough to warrant examination. Let’s attempt to expand and define the variables fully and study some solutions, without getting distracted.

The first diagram on the left, inscribed on the back of the girl with shapely hips, shows a Feynman diagram of an interaction between some known fundamental particles (I see the w- guage particle, indicating a weak force interaction), and what looks like a set of equations describing the rules of the interaction. There’s a chance she shouldn’t be working with straight, linear vectors and equations, knowing how messy subatomic interactions can be. It’s probably not possible to describe the x, y, and z values for an interaction of that size with current technology what it is, though, so she gets a pass. I always got upset when my physics and math professors used the i, j, k notation for the dimensional parameters of their vectors, instead of x, y, z, because it was easy to confuse with the notation for imaginary numbers, *i, *and the symbol for the coefficient of permissivity of waves through a medium,* k*. Some theories claim there are more than 11 dimensional values that need to be taken into account, but I’ve heard your glasses have to be at least 2 cm thick to experience them. The author of the equations on girly #1 should probably research geodisics, radial mathematics, conics, spirals, and line integrals, to describe the equations on her body as elegantly as possible. This is only possible with increased detectional ability from destructivist particle smashing devices. Maybe some basher at the Large Hadron Collider could take some time out of his busy schedule destroying the universe to talk to her about it.

The second girl on the left, whose pale, delicate skin is sure to incite comment, is sporting a definitional cheat-sheet for a kinematics class. I would hope her romantic relations are less duplicitous. F=ma doesn’t hold fast beyond a certain macroscopic threshold without copious amounts of geometrical interactions that also take subatomic properties into account, though, and if she’s working with expectation values (typically represented by ψ), that’s most likely the case. The author of the equations on girly #2 should research tension diagrams, spherically inwards-pointing integrals, and perhaps disregard their initial evaluation of the exponent of e for something more descriptively accurate, to arrive at the best solution. This is only applicable if the current equations can be rewritten with mathematical equations that develop and expand one line at a time, from top to bottom, line by line, using either physics notation or mathematics notation exclusively. I can’t tell if the v stands for velocity or momentum, or if the c stands for constant, or for the speed of light. From what I gather, the second derivative of ψ with respect to t is relatable to E, since d(distance)/d(t) = velocity, d(velocity)/d(t) = d(d(distance)/d(t))/d(t) = acceleration, and with a little twerking of E=mc^2 and F=ma, we can get the mass, and, subsequently, the energy. Well, after that all that’s left is insertion…of its value into n(E). The equations seem to skip a lot of the inbetween bits, but she’s so unbelievably slim, there’s hardly any room to write the full form.

The third girl looks to be studying Maxwell’s equations in depth, although her shapely shoulders belie a great tension, possibly due to the difficulties in conceiving magnetic monopoles. The author of the equations on girly #3 should attempt to take into account more of the phenomenon, electromagnetic and otherwise, in physical play in order to reverse engineer / backform more of the requirements for their initial hypothesis of “downsydelta dot b” (Pauli hypothesized the positron by demanding first that it must exist for the sake of symmetry, and this hypothesis is no different), as well as make an attempt to learning how to permute linear systems of algebraic equations along brute-force tree diagram methodologies instead of relying solely on analyzing physical quantities. Some people give answers first, and then use backformation to present increasing amounts of evidence. Other people start with the basics and build up to the final point. Further work is dependent upon prerequisite knowledge being worked out in advance, from root level (root level being the prerequisite, poorly proven theory) such that an intellectual and physical middle ground upon which to sustain the framework is achieved, sort of like convincing myself I actually possess the characteristics of a person she would go on a date with. Maybe I would have a shot (after all, the positron was theorized by the physicist Wolfgang Pauli before its actual presence was verified experimentally).

The fourth girl, holding her silky hair up with a pencil that elicits a sincere chuckle, may be looking for employment studying gravitational photon lensing or generalizing equations for particle energy levels in toroidal accelerators. Those curvaceous sines and cosines probably describe circular trajectories, not oscillators. The author of the equations on girly #4 should ensure that the mathematical operands and physical operands in each of the matrices’ elements penned to her supple body are self-similar, as the elements of a matrix must not contain varied data formats in order to be mathematically clear to the observer, as well as incorporate more than two physical dimensions in the calculations, however high the powers of integration and derivation involved may be. This is only applicable if sufficient refinement of technological construction and fabrication exists to minimize aberrances in the structure, fine-tuning, and positioning of the measurement devices in the physicist’s attempt to minimize variations and mathematical noise in the numerical, non-“standard variable” data. I guess that pencil might come in handy, and I would get a better look at that beautiful hair.

I’m sure they’ll be fine, being so lovely and talented and all.

## Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.