How much harder do you have to try for each inch of height under 6'2"?
What's the mathematical function that describes the distribution as inches linearly decrease? I'm thinking it's a reverse exponential with an intercept at 6'2" with 0% effort,
(I'm using exponential because its the most natural "growth" curve and fits my experimental and observational data best)
so a 6'2" man has to apply 0% extra effort,
6'1" : 2.7% more
6'0" : 7.389 % more
5'11" : 20% more
5'10" : 54% more
5'9" : 148% more
5'8 : 403% more
5'7" : 1096% more
5'6" : 2980 % more
5'5" 8103 % more
...
5'0" 1,202,604 % more
This model applies for the social and status gain from various activities including lifting, career, and can be used as a modifier for other physical traits where height is a covariate.
For example, if a man is facially attractive, if you want to adjust the benefit for this by his height, then you can apply the model to adjust how much his 8/10 face really counts for at each height. For example an 8/10 face guy at 6'0" is actually 8 * 0.927 = 7.416/10
and then a 5'4" guy with an 8/10 face = 8 * nan, *the percentage decrease is 22026%, which means his face essentially counts for nothing or the model needs a constant to always be added.
The model explains the phenomena observed here of "manlets" compensating only to receive perceptibly zero benefit, but some slightly above average males report benefits from lifting for example.
I guess that I can't properly explain outcomes for heights over 6'2" either, except by saying they follow the same distribution but as each inch is added, they increase in additional effort required.
What's the mathematical function that describes the distribution as inches linearly decrease? I'm thinking it's a reverse exponential with an intercept at 6'2" with 0% effort,
(I'm using exponential because its the most natural "growth" curve and fits my experimental and observational data best)
so a 6'2" man has to apply 0% extra effort,
6'1" : 2.7% more
6'0" : 7.389 % more
5'11" : 20% more
5'10" : 54% more
5'9" : 148% more
5'8 : 403% more
5'7" : 1096% more
5'6" : 2980 % more
5'5" 8103 % more
...
5'0" 1,202,604 % more
This model applies for the social and status gain from various activities including lifting, career, and can be used as a modifier for other physical traits where height is a covariate.
For example, if a man is facially attractive, if you want to adjust the benefit for this by his height, then you can apply the model to adjust how much his 8/10 face really counts for at each height. For example an 8/10 face guy at 6'0" is actually 8 * 0.927 = 7.416/10
and then a 5'4" guy with an 8/10 face = 8 * nan, *the percentage decrease is 22026%, which means his face essentially counts for nothing or the model needs a constant to always be added.
The model explains the phenomena observed here of "manlets" compensating only to receive perceptibly zero benefit, but some slightly above average males report benefits from lifting for example.
I guess that I can't properly explain outcomes for heights over 6'2" either, except by saying they follow the same distribution but as each inch is added, they increase in additional effort required.
