how exactly do chemicals produce the exact

[umatheirmen]

thing that makes a living thing feel love for another just by being like a group of magnets that used be called love/? is the living soul forced into feeling love by these atoms and molecules?is it physics or evolution?

[goingtothedogs]

Is this meant to be a biology question? Or some breed of philosophy?

Edit: just took a look at the thread originators blog.... I don't think she knows whether it's meant to be a sceince or philosophy question either.

[Paralith]

The chemical and neurological mechanisms are not completely understood yet, though we do know some of the neurotransmiters and hormones involved with forming emotional bonds and some of the brain regions which specialize in our relationships with other individuals.

But I'm not sure the exact chemicals involved are really your question, if you're just trying to understand the true nature of love. Who you fall in love with and when will depend on a lot of things; yes, what we have evolved to value in a mate will be part of it. Some researchers have evidence that the smell of people with diverse immune function genes compared to our own is attractive to us. But it's important to understand that as humans, we have a long history of assessing our environment, assessing our needs, and adjusting what we're looking for in a mate accordingly. And compatible personality is actually an important factor; you want to make sure that you and your mate will get along long enough to successfully raise your offspring to adulthood (and maybe even beyond) together. That's especially true in today's western societies because a woman doesn't necessarily need a man or vice versa in order to successfully raise her offspring. If anything is going to keep them together it will be their enjoyment of each other's company, and even if two parents are not required, they're still better than one.

I hope that helps a bit. I'll wait and see your response since I'm still not sure exactly what you're looking for.

[DrCloud]

Some researchers have evidence that the smell of people with diverse immune function genes compared to our own is attractive to us.

So...the smell of love is in the air, hmm? I don't know when I've ever heard anything so romantic.
HPH

[Paralith]

Some researchers have evidence that the smell of people with diverse immune function genes compared to our own is attractive to us.

So...the smell of love is in the air, hmm? I don't know when I've ever heard anything so romantic.
HPH

Or on the t-shirts. :p I've attached the paper on the study, in case you're interested.

[BioWizard]

But it's important to understand that as humans, we have a long history of assessing our environment, assessing our needs, and adjusting what we're looking for in a mate accordingly.

I find that a much more reasonable approach than some of Forest's musings about how there might never be a common understanding given the fact that the girls from some tribe at the top of some mountain don't care all that much if the guy has a new shiny car. Yes there are always behavioral and perceptual alterations (not to mention exceptions) induced by cultural and economic differences, but that still doesn't mean it's everything-goes randomness. Of course I'm not just talking about mate attraction, but rather in general. I know Forest is going to write a long post now to show me how I'm being too narrow minded (ivory tower scientist?) and missing the big picture, then list all the exceptions and caution against trying to fit human emotion/behavior into any kind of scientific model =) [in all fairness, he does raise very good points sometimes]

[Paralith]

Forest has a great appreciation of the huge variety of human behavior and expression, and I think it's an appreciation that anyone ultimately interested in human behavior should have. But as you say Bio, that does not mean there is no pattern or cause behind it. Certainly some of the variations from society to society are the cultural equivalents of neutral evolution, but if I've learned anything in my first few semesters of grad school it is that an adaptive flexibility to the existing environmental conditions that has allowed humans to do so well in so many places. And when you get right down to it and test it, so much variation is in fact nicely explained and predicted by this ability. (Even the wonky things we humans do in response to the new modern environment, too.)

[goingtothedogs]

As it happens, I'm just reading Matt Ridley's "The Red Queen" - sub-title "Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature"

A the moment it's covering the evolution of sex (generally, not just in humans) as being driven by the need to constantly fight a changing battle against parasites and desease. I await with interest the point where it turns human specific. I may report back...... :-)

In fact I have a question, but it's not relevant to this thread, so about to post a new thread.

Umatheirman...... my apologies. I sounded really grouchy in my first post here. Very sorry. It was a bad day and I let it spill over into the forum. I shouldn't have.

[Gypsy Eyes]

Love is complex on many levels. Let's talk about attachment for a second. A very specific hormone and neurotransmitter, oxytocin, has been linked to a mother's immediate attachment to her baby (love for her child) upon birth as it is released during parturation. Not only that, women and men both release the aforementioned neurotransmitter following an orgasm (women at much higher levels than men), leading some researchers to speculate that this leads to women's immediate attachment to their lovers while men tend to be able to dissociate sex from feelings more frequently.

[goingtothedogs]

Interesting point.

In fact we had a thread a year or so back, which I cannot currently track down, in which we were discussing the various ways in which males (acroos the animal kingdom, not just humans) can influence the female perspective.

One of the things that came out, and which as I recall scandalised some members of the forum, was that semen contains oxytocin.

Chemical warfare....... ;-)

[Bippitybop]

It would be helpful to differentiate between the concept of love (pair bonding) and the concept of attraction (mate choice). The MHC/t-shirt study is an example of mate choice: a female may find a trait sexually attractive and decide to accept a male's sperm (sexual selection) but it does not follow that she wishes to enter into some sort of monogamous relationship with him.

Across animal taxa, OT has been associated with pair bonding and maternal care.

Here's a pertinent TED talk by Helen Fisher, "The brain in love":

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/helen_fisher_studies_the_brain_in_love.html