The "Physics" of Chemistry

Jake LeMotta

You know when you meet someone, doesn't happen regularly, but sometimes - and it's "stronger" with some people than with others - but it's like you get hit a little bit or something.

WHAM! As I said, stronger with some than others but there's a definite something there beyond thinking, "Wow, she looks hot" or something along those lines.
In other words, a chemistry.

Just to clarify - the opposing, as such, situation would be; she looks very nice, all together, cool, whatever.
There is an attraction that could develop into a chemistry as the two people get to know each other?
But not that initial explosive feeling.

Just out of curiosity, what are peoples opinions on the actual cause of this feeling? This chemistry?

*********

Another poster described a situation in another thread;

I think women dress the way they do in pubs/nightclubs for two main reasons.

1. To be better at playing the mating game. Being horny and looking for a relationship come under this reason. Women have a natural seductress/temptress side to them where they bait men into taking action. It's the natural mating dynamic at work. In my opinion women get turned on from turning on attractive men and having the effect over a man where he is losing control of himself he finds her that sexy.

The description of how the female can have the affect over the male in such a way as to make him feel completely uncomfortable, probably turn away, trying to avoid eye contact and so on. Thus the affect she is having on him.

IMO this is chemistry at work.
She wouldn't wish to imbue this type of reaction unless there was a desire (fairly strong one probably) on her part also.
The reaction is a clear indicator that there is a strong attraction on the opposing persons part also and yeah - as the poster said - it's the mating dynamic at work right?

So again, what's the cause of this?
Two people who've never met before, haven't had any verbal exchange, what cause's this strong attraction?

***********

This is my opinion of what's happening:

To a certain degree our nature or character is reflected in our body. The way we carry ourselves, the expression we have, the vibe and signals we give off, the natural look on our face, the way our features are formed - so on.

When two people meet and their natures are complimentary - I don't think that would is sufficient to describe exactly what I'm trying to get across, but it'll do for now - there is that attraction.

By complimentary I mean, they would naturally "get on" or have good relations as such, as the human beings they are, given their characteristics.

For example, say you have a person, the female, and in their character they are naturally, I dunno, sensitive say. Everyone is sensitive but for this person it is particularly prominent in their character.

Take another person, the male. In their character kindness is particularly prominent. Everyone is kind, everyone has that quality on some level. But for this male, kindness is a particularly prominent quality.

Therefore, given the prominent characteristics, these two people are likely to get along.
The qualities compliment each other. The sensitive person is less likely to get, I dunno, hurt or something, by the significant other due to the fact that their kind nature is less likely to have that affect.

These characteristics show through in, as I said already, their demeanor, expression, features, tone of voice perhaps, so on.
And therefore, with very little personal exchange, a strong attraction is already in place.
And this is the chemistry.

Of course I think other factors play a part also.
And I don't mean to be crude or sound condescending here, but if one person is unsure of themselves, lacking in confidence/self belief, has a lax and non-challenging lifestyle - and the other really has it all together, self assured, things happening for them - even with the complimenting characteristics, a relationship is not/less likely to be formed.
So there's more to it than just the above.

But the above does add that extra strong attraction in the case where two people might be on the same level in terms of "strength of character", in a manner of speaking.
Again apologies if the above sounds cavalier, I think it gets across the point though.

Thoughts, opinions, experiences, contributions, criticism (preferably constructive)?

Zombrex

Humans tend to stereotype people very quickly based upon first impressions, not just how they look but as you say how they carry themselves, how they sound and react. We do this very quickly

We get a "wow" feeling when this image in our head ticks off a number of the boxes of what we find attractive.

Interestingly this first impression can be quite difficult to shake even if it actually turns out the person was nothing like what we initially imagined they were.

Jake LeMotta

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I think women dress the way they do in pubs/nightclubs for two main reasons.

1. To be better at playing the mating game. Being horny and looking for a relationship come under this reason. Women have a natural seductress/temptress side to them where they bait men into taking action. It's the natural mating dynamic at work. In my opinion women get turned on from turning on attractive men and having the effect over a man where he is losing control of himself he finds her that sexy.

2. To feel good about themselves. This one comes under the reason women have been giving of "I do it for myself". Being higher in the social hierarchy feels good. Validating a self image of being attractive feels good. Getting attention from men will help attain those goals. I think
competiveness between women falls under this category too because the the competition is played for the most part through the channel of male attention. Competition is about social hierarchy too.

Just to make specific reference to this point.
I think this highlights an interesting point.

To use an expression you probably won't find in the dictionary, when you "oogle" a woman, it's like a natural turn off.
Nothing more sure to provoke a dismissive glance.

I guess same for guys. If a woman plain stares a guy out of it in an attempt to attract him, no one wants it when it's that easy, even if the girl is very nice looking - a positive reaction is fairly unlikely to be forthcoming.

A seductive leer however is much more likely to put a guy on edge.

Am I just rewording your post with this following point?

The attractive thing for a female is to put a guy on edge. As you say, "bait him into taking the action".
That's a turn on for a girl.
And I guess a turn on for a guy is to be put on edge.

But how would this dynamic manifest itself if there was not a reasonably strong chemistry present initially?

Maybe less provocative but, non-the-less inviting, flirtatious glances.
An exchange of these leading to initiation of verbal communication?
I refer to a situation where there is an attraction but not a "chemical" attraction.

Jake LeMotta

Wicknight wrote: »

Humans tend to stereotype people very quickly based upon first impressions, not just how they look but as you say how they carry themselves, how they sound and react. We do this very quickly

We get a "wow" feeling when this image in our head ticks off a number of the boxes of what we find attractive.

Interestingly this first impression can be quite difficult to shake even if it actually turns out the person was nothing like what we initially imagined they were.

I just gotta reply to that real quick before I go to work while the answer is still fresh in my head.

I believe your right. The WOW feeling is inspired by the fact that their image for, I believe, the reason I pointed out, ticks the boxes that we find attract as such.
That does not however, I believe, mean that their image - the "boxes they have ticked" - is not what they are.

In other words, what we see is in fact what they are.

I believe what we may tend to do however is augment what we see with fantastical imaginings.
I'm sure everyone can think of an example of a time when they did this themselves.

When we get to know that person, those imagining may well prove to be just that.
But I believe what we saw initially, those things we found attractive, that "ticked the boxes", that was "for real", and those impressions will be valid upon getting to know that person.
Just the fantastical augmentation that can be misleading IMO.
I'm open to criticism of course.

seenitall

I will give you one true-life example of chemistry, although chemistry between two people is a very wide-ranging concept, and I have been lucky enough in my life to experience many different pleasant aspects of it, some of which were even long lasting and beneficial to me.

However, taking as an example a very obvious one; my chemistry with my ex OH.

I was raised in a very pressurised atmosphere of excessive control, smothering and criticism, as meted out by a parent. Emotional and mental abuse was at play. Therefore, when I went out into the world, the man who I found myself most attracted to, and with whom I "clicked" massively on both an emotional and sexual level ("love at first sight" if ever I felt it), turned out to be a controlling, over critical and unresponsive man. Which was just a start, as I found myself repeating the pattern of that attraction over the years.

I was conditioned most forcefully from my childhood onward to have an immediate emotional response to this type of person (my parent), and childhood conditioning is a very very strong subconscious force that determines our patterns of attraction (chemistry?).

Another type of chemistry that I have experienced is an easy-going cameraderie type of thing, so really the exact opposite of the first case. This can easily be friendship, it is not necesserily sexual in its nature, but the sexual undertone may well be present (and welcome) as well. I believe it is most probably down to the general compatibility of character traits; as you have said, someone who is confident, outgoing and active for example will hardly "gel" or "click" with a laid back, lax and/or insecure person, and will much more probably find excitement and validation in meeting a person who shares those character traits. Chemistry.

Jake LeMotta

seenitall wrote: »

I will give you one true-life example of chemistry, although chemistry between two people is a very wide-ranging concept, and I have been lucky enough in my life to experience many different pleasant aspects of it, some of which were even long lasting and beneficial to me.

However, taking as an example a very obvious one; my chemistry with my ex OH.

I was raised in a very pressurised atmosphere of excessive control, smothering and criticism, as meted out by a parent. Emotional and mental abuse was at play. Therefore, when I went out into the world, the man who I found myself most attracted to, and with whom I "clicked" massively on both an emotional and sexual level ("love at first sight" if ever I felt it), turned out to be a controlling, over critical and unresponsive man. Which was just a start, as I found myself repeating the pattern of that attraction over the years.

I was conditioned most forcefully from my childhood onward to have an immediate emotional response to this type of person (my parent), and childhood conditioning is a very very strong subconscious force that determines our patterns of attraction (chemistry?).

Another type of chemistry that I have experienced is an easy-going cameraderie type of thing, so really the exact opposite of the first case. This can easily be friendship, it is not necesserily sexual in its nature, but the sexual undertone may well be present (and welcome) as well. I believe it is most probably down to the general compatibility of character traits; as you have said, someone who is confident, outgoing and active for example will hardly "gel" or "click" with a laid back, lax and/or insecure person, and will much more probably find excitement and validation in meeting a person who shares those character traits. Chemistry.

That's very interesting.
I never thought of it in that light before; as in, childhood conditioning.
So are you saying it was like a "fatal attraction" type of situation, as in being drawn to the controlling critical type?
Well, not that extreme, but you know what I mean.

You know how they say, for example, for a boy, often times the relationship he has later in life will mimic to a certain extent the type of relationship he had with his mother. Oftentimes the two females can have the same personality type to a certain extent.
From what you describe that seems to be the case in your case?


Have you considered it has anything to do with genes, why you were attracted to the type you were?
Not necessarily 100% childhood influence, but given who your parents are, you inherit their genes, or a combination of them - and this determines to a certain extent the type of person you are and therefore the type who you will click or mesh best with?
Perhaps this is why your attracted to the controlling type? Perhaps somehow you have qualities that fit well with that?

Not to come across as assuming or haughty there - just purely out of personal curiosity.

*********

Just to hop back to the whole attraction/mating dynamic point from above.

I've been mulling that over for the past few hours, while I was at work.
I work in a gym so it's actually the perfect environment to see this particular dynamic in quiet a pure form.

This is my theory.

Were fundamentally animals. Self aware and intelligent, but animals none-the-less.

The female is drawn to the "alpha' male.
By alpha I don't necessarily mean "leader of the pack".
As were humans, we don't quite function in that way.
But none-the-less, in a particular environment, I believe you will be able to find a male who super seeds the other males in this regard.
The most self assured, the most confident at what he does, the most confident in himself.

This is the point of attraction for the female.
That "macho" persona.
Again, this doesn't, I believe, necessarily mean he has to be the most physically dominant.

Perhaps the most self assured guy in a room might be the quietest guy in that room?
But the sense of self assurance is evident - in body language, signals, so on - whatever his/the situation may be.

Also, I don't believe it's just females drawn to this alpha male type. Other males, I guess people in general, will gravitate towards the "strongest", in a manner of speaking.
I guess you'll often see those with the same degree of "strength of character" associating with each other, in a manner of speaking.

Okay, so that's the male.


The female, assured in her own way, will use - as the previous poster pointed out - the temptress side to her character to "lure" the male.
If she can "pull if off", I guess, then the dynamic is underway.
By pulling it off, I mean; does the male find her attractive, sexy, alluring etc.
Glances exchanged, communication initiated, so on.

So that's pretty much it.

**********

As I said above, no better way to elicit a dismissive glance - to get "blanked" in other words - than plain staring at a girl, or being very direct in ones approach, as - and now this is just my opinion, being expressed basically for the purposes of correction and criticism - this interferes with the natural dynamic set down by, I dunno, nature I guess.

seenitall

"So are you saying it was like a "fatal attraction" type of situation, as in being drawn to the controlling critical type?"

Well, whatever about "fatal" (I survived! ) but yes, with this ex OH it was definitely a strong "gut" feeling, the kind that doesn't happen often in life, and nothing to do with rationality or logic. It was instantenous the moment I laid eyes on him. I think this is precisely what makes the situation so interesting, because you would have a case to argue that I just liked the look of him, fell in lust rather than love, etc. But having read about many cases of women who were abused in their families going on to subconsciously choose abusive husbands, I do believe there was more at play here. It just seems too coincidental that the man I fell for within seconds and went on to make a life with, is the man who I can honestly say is the most similar in character to the person whose influence over my life formed mine.

To be completely honest, I am nowadays fairly convinced that our subconscious is actually the absolute strongest force influencing our choices, tastes, decisions. It is still very much an unexplored territory.

"You know how they say, for example, for a boy, often times the relationship he has later in life will mimic to a certain extent the type of relationship he had with his mother. Oftentimes the two females can have the same personality type to a certain extent.
From what you describe that seems to be the case in your case?"

Yes, there is deffo also a repeat of a family pattern going on with me. My parents ended up divorced, and so did I. There is a correlation and mirroring of family traits. I don't want to reveal anything more about this as it is too sensitive for me to do so, suffice it to say you are on the money.

"Have you considered it has anything to do with genes, why you were attracted to the type you were?
Not necessarily 100% childhood influence, but given who your parents are, you inherit their genes, or a combination of them - and this determines to a certain extent the type of person you are and therefore the type who you will click or mesh best with?
Perhaps this is why your attracted to the controlling type? Perhaps somehow you have qualities that fit well with that?"

Hmmmm... no, I wouldn't say any qualities I have fit well with the controlling type of person. I would say it is more likely than not the psychological damage that I carried over from childhood that makes me feel triggered, or drawn, or attracted by a certain type.

However, you could be right as well. Nature vs. nurture debate. I have already said there is a transference of family traits in my case, but whether it is due more to purely DNA, or more living with those characteristics and mirroring them at the most formative age, I haven't a clue...

Jake LeMotta

seenitall wrote: »

Well, whatever about "fatal" (I survived! ) but yes, with this ex OH it was definitely a strong "gut" feeling, the kind that doesn't happen often in life, and nothing to do with rationality or logic. It was instantenous the moment I laid eyes on him. I think this is precisely what makes the situation so interesting, because you would have a case to argue that I just liked the look of him, fell in lust rather than love, etc. But having read about many cases of women who were abused in their families going on to subconsciously choose abusive husbands, I do believe there was more at play here. It just seems too coincidental that the man I fell for within seconds and went on to make a life with, is the man who I can honestly say is the most similar in character to the person whose influence over my life formed mine.

To be completely honest, I am nowadays fairly convinced that our subconscious is actually the absolute strongest force influencing our choices, tastes, decisions. It is still very much an unexplored territory.

Ah, so what your saying effectively is your subconscious programming which has been developed by your past experience has affected your conscious ability to find someone attractive?
Would that be correct?

After all, I guess a relationship will not be formed with somebody unless there is an attraction, as the correlating attractive signals will not be emitted.

seenitall wrote: »

Hmmmm... no, I wouldn't say any qualities I have fit well with the controlling type of person. I would say it is more likely than not the psychological damage that I carried over from childhood that makes me feel triggered, or drawn, or attracted by a certain type.

However, you could be right as well. Nature vs. nurture debate. I have already said there is a transference of family traits in my case, but whether it is due more to purely DNA, or more living with those characteristics and mirroring them at the most formative age, I haven't a clue...

Same thing again?
The subconscious programming you have developed due to past experience triggers the attraction.
Yeah, I've repeated exactly what you have just stated.
Possibly simple familiarity with that type of person, someone you can identify and know how to communicate with on a certain level?
Just speculating.

Yeah I guess subconscious programming affects us on all levels.
We compare the current experience were having with the ones we have had in the past.
Say for example love in a relationship is linked with the pain of the break up. When a new relationship is formed we will automatically associate the potential love with the pain which is now subconsciously associated with it and thus probably be more cautious in our advances.

It's just interesting why you find the attraction with something which has a negative association.
Again, possibly familiarity? Your know what your gonna get?

(Just to repeat, the attraction being based on visual impact due to the characteristics being reflected in features, expression, signals, body language etc, IMO)

Oh, and apologies - fatal attraction was a bit dramatic alright
What I meant to say was, this attraction was ultimately detrimental right?
Therefore an overcoming of the subconscious programming to a degree where an equally strong attraction for someone who doesn't fit this programmed type (controlling etc) would obviously be beneficial.

Perhaps a better understanding of the "mating dynamic" - which I'm trying to get my own head around at the moment - would be beneficial in that an attraction could be formed on something which is not based on past experiences as such, but something more "superficial" (not that these things are superficial, but just in comparison to the deep rooted subconscious beliefs) like, I dunno, nice body or something.

Then upon development of a relationship and with getting to know that person, getting on well with them, more positive subconscious associations may be developed, a familiarity with them and therefore an attraction towards future partners who share their characteristics, these characteristics again being reflected in features etc and therefore the "love at first sight" feeling may now extend beyond the controlling, "detrimental" type of person.

Okay, that last paragraph probably makes sense only to me.
I've rambled enough.

seenitall

"Ah, so what your saying effectively is your subconscious programming which has been developed by your past experience has affected your conscious ability to find someone attractive?
Would that be correct?"

Yes.

"Possibly simple familiarity with that type of person, someone you can identify and know how to communicate with on a certain level?"

Yes.

"Yeah I guess subconscious programming affects us on all levels.
We compare the current experience were having with the ones we have had in the past."

This goes on on a subconscious level.

"It's just interesting why you find the attraction with something which has a negative association.
Again, possibly familiarity? Your know what your gonna get?"

BINGO.

"What I meant to say was, this attraction was ultimately detrimental right?"

Right.

"Therefore an overcoming of the subconscious programming to a degree where an equally strong attraction for someone who doesn't fit this programmed type (controlling etc) would obviously be beneficial.

"Perhaps a better understanding of the "mating dynamic" - which I'm trying to get my own head around at the moment - would be beneficial in that an attraction could be formed on something which is not based on past experiences as such, but something more "superficial" (not that these things are superficial, but just in comparison to the deep rooted subconscious beliefs) like, I dunno, nice body or something.

Then upon development of a relationship and with getting to know that person, getting on well with them, more positive subconscious associations may be developed, a familiarity with them and therefore an attraction towards future partners who share their characteristics, these characteristics again being reflected in features etc and therefore the "love at first sight" feeling may now extend beyond the controlling, "detrimental" type of person."

Absolutely This is what I am trying to work on at the moment. If I can. I will be very happy if I can break the pattern of attraction/chemistry with the type of people who have always been detrimental to my wellbeing, and "find" one in some way with the type who will be wholly beneficial to me. I think it will be difficult as I have always been a "gut" person, very much led by my instinctive responses, which are powerful enough and I think it is very very difficult to try ignoring or "unlearning" my programmed responses.

Jake LeMotta

seenitall wrote: »

"Ah, so what your saying effectively is your subconscious programming which has been developed by your past experience has affected your conscious ability to find someone attractive?
Would that be correct?"

Yes.

"Possibly simple familiarity with that type of person, someone you can identify and know how to communicate with on a certain level?"

Yes.

"Yeah I guess subconscious programming affects us on all levels.
We compare the current experience were having with the ones we have had in the past."

This goes on on a subconscious level.

"It's just interesting why you find the attraction with something which has a negative association.
Again, possibly familiarity? Your know what your gonna get?"

BINGO.

"What I meant to say was, this attraction was ultimately detrimental right?"

Right.

"Therefore an overcoming of the subconscious programming to a degree where an equally strong attraction for someone who doesn't fit this programmed type (controlling etc) would obviously be beneficial.

"Perhaps a better understanding of the "mating dynamic" - which I'm trying to get my own head around at the moment - would be beneficial in that an attraction could be formed on something which is not based on past experiences as such, but something more "superficial" (not that these things are superficial, but just in comparison to the deep rooted subconscious beliefs) like, I dunno, nice body or something.

Then upon development of a relationship and with getting to know that person, getting on well with them, more positive subconscious associations may be developed, a familiarity with them and therefore an attraction towards future partners who share their characteristics, these characteristics again being reflected in features etc and therefore the "love at first sight" feeling may now extend beyond the controlling, "detrimental" type of person."

Absolutely This is what I am trying to work on at the moment. If I can. I will be very happy if I can break the pattern of attraction/chemistry with the type of people who have always been detrimental to my wellbeing, and "find" one in some way with the type who will be wholly beneficial to me. I think it will be difficult as I have always been a "gut" person, very much led by my instinctive responses, which are powerful enough and I think it is very very difficult to try ignoring or "unlearning" my programmed responses.

That's cool. Very interesting to hear your experience.
I like to think and at the moment this particular subject is one I find very interesting, so fair play for sharing. Good luck with that.

Sugar Shane Moses

Hey, check this book out..

The Reluctant Fundamentalist

One of the main themes it deals with is totally relative to this thread.

seenitall (still active?) - how goes it?

prinz

IMO it's intuition that plays a more role than sexual attraction... but more and more these days sexual attraction is pushed to the fore at the expense of all else when it comes to defining this 'chemistry'. There can be amazing chemistry without sexual attraction and vice versa.