/sci/ - Science & Math

>>6393798
Disgusting. She looks like a R. Crumb woman where all the muscle got replaced with fat

>>6393798
Estrogen.

>>6393798
> not knowing biology
> 2014
I lol'd

deoxyribonucleic acid

>>6393813
Wow... just wow.

>>6393814
>>6393812
>>6393813


none of these are even close to an answer.

>>6393810
your synapses are misfiring, go to a mechanic

>>6393822
>grasping at strawmen

>>6393825
>strawmen

>using terms incorrectly

>>6393825
>grasping at strawmen

the closest answer i could provide you OP is pheromones

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pheromone#Humans

>>6393834
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pheromone#Humans

very interesting but Im looking for things more basic than pheromones and odors.

brain chemistry shit

The sorts of things that you're attracted to are likely hardwired in the structure of your brain. It's like the reason you can see faces in the clouds, on pieces of toast: your brain instinctively knows exactly what the shape of a face is and it looks for them everywhere.

There might be a hormone or something that tells you, for instance, at some stage of development which sex to find attractive. But there's no way you could give someone a drug to make them attracted to a table. That's just implausible.

>>6393855
> weeaboos
Your whole claim is invalidated.

>>6393798
>And can those chemicals / neurons be rewired to make men attracted to inanimate objects, other men, animals, etc?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_bomb

>>6393855
How come some ppl are sexually attracted to tables, cars, theme park rides, inanimate stuff .... ?

>>6393798
ITT: OP either wants to find a cure for faggots or wants to make all people become fetishist furry faggots

>>6393798

For thelove of god post sauce I must MASTURBATE to her

>>6393880
Have you ever driven your car to the Tables of Testosterone ride at the theme park?

is Op's pic photoshopped?

im sorry.

to be fair watch don jon.

also some people can overcome attraction which is something you might need to take into account.

that poofy one. it's designed to cloud your mind. i have no idea how it works, just that it's pheromonical in nature.

>>6393812
Gotta be this.

>best friend comes out as trans
>weirded out but accept it because best friend
>becomes less weird over time
>after two years friend actually looks like a girl
>after three years friend looks like a hot girl
>boners

>>6394009
Still your best friend?

>>6394015
Yep

>>6394009

did he feel like a man trapped in a womens body?

there is no chemical. attractiveness is likely based upon a combination hormones and social conditioning

>>6394035
>hormones
>not a chemical

>>6394037
yeah, oops.

goodluck controlling hormones OP
good luck with social conditioning

>>6394037

Are... are you twelve?

At a basic level? As in, what makes you feel attracted to someone? It's going to be a mixture of glutamate, dopamine, and serotonin (5HT) most likely. All of which are feeding into your synapses and triggering neurons which somehow results in you feeling attracted to something.

The neurological basis of being attracted to things and the idea that you can scan someone's brain or rewire them to make them homosexual, however, is right now pretty impossible to do and to know at that kind of subtle level.

There is no "one chemical" or "one bit of the brain". It just doesn't work like that. You don't smell something that only sexy people give off and feel attracted to it. There's a whole heap of things from experience, societal pressure, biological triggers and pressures all mixing to give the result.

>>6393798
holy fuck those hips, i wouldnt expect visiting /sci/ would result int this...

>>6394108
Never fapped to jacob barnett?

>>6394093
>a thirteen year old forgets about oxytocin

>>6394186
you didn't even understand the concept. Do you know what neurotransmitters are?

>>6394203
I am a neuroscience major.

Any list of neurotransmitters involved in attraction that doesn't include oxytocin, is likely the work of a pop-sci retard.

>>6393798

No, it's not about chemicals in the first place. It's also genetically and psychological.

We have heuristics about the look of people with "good" attributes, that's why you find a "attractiveness" reaction even within the same gender.

That doesn't necessarily mean a man wants to have intercourse with a different man, but he recognises him as attractive and behaves accordingly.

Tha whole hormon stuff comes into play when actual behaviour is demanded, but it is rather a reaction (to be more accurate: it's moderating behaviour) than a trigger.


>is it all just a physical process or is there more to it than just atoms?

Much more.

It starts with you "role modells", your likes and dislikes (often based on rather arbitraty experiences), your own look and so on.

Bu it also depends on your specific needs. Some people need more safety, some people need more arrousal, some seek for a very deep relationship, some have difficulties with opening themselfes or just don't need somebody very close to them (i.e. because of friends).

But whatever the person wants, its always more than just "physics". Getting and/or maintaining a (sexual) partner is about the most difficult part for most animals. And for humans it's even more complicated, because there are so many levels of interaction in a partnership.

It really is anything but simple.
Sorry.

>>6394271
tl;dr

>>6394274
>tl;dr
Get off /sci/

>>6394275
>please moot make me a janitor. people don't like my poorly spelled, over-long rehashings of inane pop-sci platitudes.

>>6394216
ok neuoroscience major, so how does a G-protein coupled receptor (that is the oxytocin receptor) exert its effects in the cell? Does it open ion channels? (not in this case) it upregulates genes affect the excitability of cells by altering various other parameters but eventually the signalling between cell that will determine the fire/not fire action will be determined by those neurotransmitters in the micro scale. Please think before you write, neuroscience major.

>>6394135
THANK YOU

>>6394020
do you think she'd let you fuck her?

>>6394271
>it's not about chemicals in the first place. It's also genetically and psychological.

sorry but genes are chemicals and psychology boils down to chemistry anyway

how is 1950 treating you?

>>6394320
I might have understood you wrong, if that's the case i'd like to apologize in advance.
But did you just imply a GPCR can't open ion channels?

>sci is easily the most interesting board i've started to frequent
>it's slow as shit

>>6394582

PC Load Letter? What the fuck does that mean?

>>6394216
>neuroscience major

>tfw want to go into neuroscience but no neuroscience major at my uni

settling for philosophy/physics dual degree, but god damn i cant wait for grad school

>>6394512
chemistry all boils down to atoms anyway though

to describe what is chemically happening on that small and complicated of a scale would be extremely difficult and impractical, which is why we don't try

with your logic, we all should only be describing things in terms of ever-smaller scales of physics, even though that would be pointlessly inefficient

>>6394638
>to describe what is chemically happening on that small and complicated of a scale would be extremely difficult and impractical
>impractical
Why would it be impractical to know what is actually happening? Is it impractical to know how enzymes work?
Chemistry definitely is only one aspect of how the brain works because you also need to relate it to behaviour, psychology and physiology, but it's definitely important, and essential for understanding how the brain works.

>>6394638
Except you care wrong in this case since the chemicals are extremely relevant to any explanation. For example reducing testosterone will reduce a mans appetite for sex and his attraction to women/men/etc

Chemicals are a good level of reduction here...

>>6394544
no i said the GPCRs activated by oxytocin do not open ion channels

This pretty basic shape

>>6394009
>trans
>looks like a hot girl

I call bullshit.
Pics, nao.

>>6394865
That's not a fucking shape. A shape implies a closed figure. Those are two lines.

>>6395335
*line segments

>>6395336
*infinitely many lines

>>6395335
alright.

I still think it is interesting, though, that our brain can find two line segments attractive in a visceral way. It proves that our brain is actually hard wired in some way.

>>6395346
*gestalt closure

>>6394848
Okay then.
Then again, couldn't it just be that they exist but we just haven't found them yet?
Besides, i think a long term effect like affection seems very likely to be influenced by something changing a cell's response pattern.
Not that i disaggree with your original post, oxytocine may be a factor, but the actual effectors are most likely your average neurotransmitters.