Beauty, like almost every other random thingamajig around, is grounded to the teeth in science For instance theres the golden 3.14 that accounts for every twist and turn in the beauty of anything. The closer your measurements align with the Magic Pi, the sexier, generally speaking you are.

Bearing this fact in mind, just how appealing, taking every such measurement into account, is the Following Human Face on a scale of 1-10?

 

 

 

For instance theres the golden 3.14 that accounts for every twist and turn in the beauty of anything.

 

The "Golden Ratio" is (approximately) 1.618 not 3.14. Also, the idea that it is related to beauty in art and architecture may be a bit of a myth. I haven't seen any convincing evidence that this is the case.

 

The closer your measurements align with the Magic Pi, the sexier, generally speaking you are.

 

And the golden ratio is Phi, not Pi. And I am quite sure there is no evidence relating it to sexiness.

 

Bearing this fact in mind, just how appealing, taking every such measurement into account, is the Following Human Face on a scale of 1-10?

 

I think it makes you look a bit manic.

It's almost impossible for me to be objective about it after reading your mistakes posed as assertions. Being wrong is part of living, but why the need to be adamantly wrong? You should check your facts before stating them as such. This is a science discussion site, and you have time to be rigorous before you post.

 

So now it seems like you made up your assertions and asked me to bear them in mind as facts, in order to elicit an authoritative response to "Do you think I'm pretty?" OK, you could have just asked without the intellectual deception. You're probably very sexy-looking.

 

But why did you give us such a heavily shopped photo that strips details and information from any meaningful assessment? The earlier deception is evidence that you might be removing such information in order to manipulate our conclusions.

 

Fundamental mistakes bring out the nitpicker in me, but I don't feel it's misplaced in this instance.

I give it a ϕ.