I think I have qualia associated with small numbers.
The closest analogy I can think of is “butterflies in your stomach, but with a pitch”. I say pitch not because it’s auditory (it’s not), but because it seems to be the same feeling but higher or lower for different numbers (not in intensity, but in … pitch).
Is it possible that this has something to do with how rounded the shapes are? I noticed that the ratio of cusps to rounded edges (a circle counting for two) is 1:0, 2:0, 3:1, 2:0 for the male digits and 0:2, 1:1, 0:3, 0:4, 0:3 for the female digits. Though obviously this can change with typeface it often remains more or less true.
People with number form synesthesia sometimes have the first twelve digits in the form of of a clock face, I was wondering if something similar was going on with male bodies usually being relatively angular in comparison to female bodies.
This reminds me of people that say that (small) numbers are not on a straight, equidistant line for them but on some kind of curve where numbers do bunch together or take turns.
I think I have qualia associated with small numbers.
The closest analogy I can think of is “butterflies in your stomach, but with a pitch”. I say pitch not because it’s auditory (it’s not), but because it seems to be the same feeling but higher or lower for different numbers (not in intensity, but in … pitch).
I associate genders with digits, based on their shapes. 1, 4, 5, and 7 are distinctly male. 0, 2, 6, 8, and 9 are distinctly female.
Is it possible that this has something to do with how rounded the shapes are? I noticed that the ratio of cusps to rounded edges (a circle counting for two) is 1:0, 2:0, 3:1, 2:0 for the male digits and 0:2, 1:1, 0:3, 0:4, 0:3 for the female digits. Though obviously this can change with typeface it often remains more or less true.
Yes, I think that’s where the association comes from.
Thank you.
People with number form synesthesia sometimes have the first twelve digits in the form of of a clock face, I was wondering if something similar was going on with male bodies usually being relatively angular in comparison to female bodies.
I doubt it. For me, 1, 3, 8, and 9, are all male, whereas 0, 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7 are all female.
3? 15? 26? 52? −1?
I associate genders with digits, not numbers—so 15 is 1 and 5, 26 is 2 and 6, and so on. 3 is female.
Neat; thanks!
These experiences sound like synesthesia, in case anyone’s unfamiliar with the concept and wants further reading.
This reminds me of people that say that (small) numbers are not on a straight, equidistant line for them but on some kind of curve where numbers do bunch together or take turns.