This is a unit vector. They bound Masc and Fem to 0 to 1, sure, but what they meant about using NB to make sure it always adds up to 1 was attempting to set this up as a unit vector. It was just a little clumsily defined.
So then given that it’s a unit vector, “n” is there to represent non-adherence to the Masc and Fem spectrum. Someone can’t be half Masc in a unit vector without being half-something-else, and if that something else isn’t Fem, then it’s NB. Their expression would be some Masc but also some gender-non-specific things, without a lot of Fem traits.
the sum of the dimensions equalling to 1 doesn’t make it a unit vector. For it to be a unit vector its magnitude must equal 1. There is just an overlap where some values, like <1,0,0> or <0,1,0> that both sum to 1 and have a magnitude of 1. We expect that the domains of m,f,n are in 0-1.
So a vector like <0.5, 0, 0.5> sums to 1… but it’s not a unit vector, because its’ magnitude ( sqrt( M2 + F2 + N2 )) is 0.7071… not a unit vector. To make it a unit you’d have to divide each of the dimensions by that magnitude. So the unit vector of <0.5, 0, 0.5> is <0.70711..., 0, 0.70711...>
Calculating the unit vectors prior to doing the dot/cross products means you’re doing operations on two equally sized vectors which would give more consistent results.
I would guess that by “geometrically sum” they meant the magnitude (I don’t see what else they could have meant). I’m pretty sure I’ve heard it used in that way before although I don’t think it’s a standardized term
You’re absolutely right, and I’m a dumbass! I wonder if the original poster made the same oversight I did, and actually did intend it to be a unit vector but messed up…
If you normalize the vector prior to doing the dot/cross then you don’t have to worry about restraining the domains of any of the dimensions. In fact, it’s easier if you don’t.
ACTUALLY, go one level deeper… abandon simple Vector3, do a 2x2 Matri. Like let V1 represent Gender…<M,F> and V2 represents Attraction <H,Q>
You could write up a quesionarie with Nth number of questions with answers that assign points into you dimensions. The points would respond to how Masculine/Feminine, Hetero/Queer any one answer is. And because the vectors will be normalized later, the number of points is arbitrary. You can assign any number of points to different dimensions based on how that answer “feels”, make the questions modular.
For example
Some question about typical gender stereotypes?
Generic Masculine Answer (assign 2 points M)
Generic Feminine Answer( assign 2 points F)
Either Or (assign 1 point M, 1 point F, and 1 point Q)
Hyper Masculine (5 points M, 2 points H)
the domains don’t matter anymore, because if someone answers in a way to get a result like V1<546, 0>, normalized it becomes <1,0>. V2 <235,0> => <1,0>… so your our Matrix is now
[ [1,0] , [1,0] ]
or masculine straight af
Embys would end up with a normalized V1 where both M/F are near equal. Bisexuals would have V2s near equal…
You could have any mix giving way to interesting matrixes. And you can still multiple the Matrices from one person against another to do some interesting transformations.
Math aside, I myself am none of non-binary, genderqueer, gender-non-conforming, nor agender, but I do wonder if any of these people feel like “equal mix of Masc and Fem” is what best describes them, or if “neither Masc nor Fem” feels more right. Because if so, having that 3rd dimension might still be useful, but I don’t know.
![gender math [gay calculator]](https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/pictrs/image/79007dcf-f743-42ce-86c7-e03d3631a981.webp){kind=link}
Wouldn’t a unit vector make more sense, in this case, rather than binding any one dimesion to an arbitrary range?
Also, Im a bit confused on “n” both in its calculation and value as a dimension?
Also, cross products wouldn’t give you a single value. You’d get the vector orthogonal to both.
This is a unit vector. They bound Masc and Fem to 0 to 1, sure, but what they meant about using NB to make sure it always adds up to 1 was attempting to set this up as a unit vector. It was just a little clumsily defined.
So then given that it’s a unit vector, “n” is there to represent non-adherence to the Masc and Fem spectrum. Someone can’t be half Masc in a unit vector without being half-something-else, and if that something else isn’t Fem, then it’s NB. Their expression would be some Masc but also some gender-non-specific things, without a lot of Fem traits.
That’s what they’re going for, at least.
the sum of the dimensions equalling to 1 doesn’t make it a unit vector. For it to be a unit vector its magnitude must equal 1. There is just an overlap where some values, like
<1,0,0>or<0,1,0>that both sum to 1 and have a magnitude of 1. We expect that the domains of m,f,n are in 0-1.So a vector like
<0.5, 0, 0.5>sums to 1… but it’s not a unit vector, because its’ magnitude ( sqrt( M2 + F2 + N2 )) is 0.7071… not a unit vector. To make it a unit you’d have to divide each of the dimensions by that magnitude. So the unit vector of<0.5, 0, 0.5>is<0.70711..., 0, 0.70711...>Calculating the unit vectors prior to doing the dot/cross products means you’re doing operations on two equally sized vectors which would give more consistent results.
I would guess that by “geometrically sum” they meant the magnitude (I don’t see what else they could have meant). I’m pretty sure I’ve heard it used in that way before although I don’t think it’s a standardized term
You’re absolutely right, and I’m a dumbass! I wonder if the original poster made the same oversight I did, and actually did intend it to be a unit vector but messed up…
It does seem like that would be easier!
If you normalize the vector prior to doing the dot/cross then you don’t have to worry about restraining the domains of any of the dimensions. In fact, it’s easier if you don’t.
ACTUALLY, go one level deeper… abandon simple Vector3, do a 2x2 Matri. Like let V1 represent Gender…<M,F> and V2 represents Attraction <H,Q>
You could write up a quesionarie with Nth number of questions with answers that assign points into you dimensions. The points would respond to how Masculine/Feminine, Hetero/Queer any one answer is. And because the vectors will be normalized later, the number of points is arbitrary. You can assign any number of points to different dimensions based on how that answer “feels”, make the questions modular.
For example
Some question about typical gender stereotypes?
the domains don’t matter anymore, because if someone answers in a way to get a result like V1<546, 0>, normalized it becomes <1,0>. V2 <235,0> => <1,0>… so your our Matrix is now
[ [1,0] , [1,0] ]
or masculine straight af
Embys would end up with a normalized V1 where both M/F are near equal. Bisexuals would have V2s near equal…
You could have any mix giving way to interesting matrixes. And you can still multiple the Matrices from one person against another to do some interesting transformations.
Math aside, I myself am none of non-binary, genderqueer, gender-non-conforming, nor agender, but I do wonder if any of these people feel like “equal mix of Masc and Fem” is what best describes them, or if “neither Masc nor Fem” feels more right. Because if so, having that 3rd dimension might still be useful, but I don’t know.
I don’t really understand your first point.
n can be determined according to this equation:
f + n + m = 1, and all the values are bounded by[0; 1]additionally.The cross product gives you the orthogonal vector, this is why they take the absolute value of it.
i think the equation actually is f² + n² + m² = 1