On September 12, 2006 Justin Timberlake selflessly endeavored to return sexy to America. A daunting task for anyone to accomplish, to be sure, but one that Mr. Timberlake handled with the poise and grace that you would expect from a guy who was doing Cameron Diaz at the time. However, in all the excitement surrounding the triumphant return of sexy, many overlooked the obvious question: how much sexy was Justin Timberlake bringing back to us? This paper answers that question by use of dubious science, which is the best kind of science that isn’t marine biology (those assholes get paid to swim with dolphins and seals and shit). <br/>

One must begin by examining how the amount of sexy has changed in the people around one’s self. To do so I use the Hefner-Nordenheimler equation of sexy determination: X = (b * t)/(1 – (F – Fd)), where X is sexy, t is time, b is the number of beers I have to drink before I give up trying to get with the hot girl I just met at Eric’s party and instead end up moving on to her slightly more chunky friend who’s a sure thing but won’t stop talking about how great her new manager at Banana Republic is, and F – Fd is how many of my friends are around to see this happen minus the number of them that are drunk and therefore unlikely to remember what you did (commonly referred to in literature as the Embarrassment Factor). Before Justin brought sexy back X was approprimately 6. Today, X = 5; a net gain of 1 sexy unit. <br/>

It should be noted that the equation above is only meant for heterosexuals. There’s a gay version of the equation above that uses mojitos instead of beer, and you have to factor in the amount of surface area covered by body glitter. Dong size might play a part in that too or something. Suffice it to say it’s beyond the scope of this research paper. <br/>

Next, we must look at the increase in personal sexiness. Granted, in my case I was nearly maxed out of sexy juice before, but in the name of science I must continue. For this, we can use the quadratic sexy equation to determine how much more sexy we are today than before. That equation has been deduced empirically in a paper published by Haling, et al, and is as follows: X = (T0 * (1/(y – m + 8v)) – (T1 * ( (y-m) / (y + m) / 4)), where 4 is not a real number.

It is a needlessly complicated equation, and I have it on good authority Haling was drunk at the time of deduction, so instead I’m going to use the Nima equation of sexiness: X = the number of single mothers that hit on me at Red Lobster. You don’t even need a calculator to figure it out. The data is shown to the right, and it pretty much speaks for itself. <br/>

Taken as a whole, the data indicates that sexy has increased a monumental 36 units. That is the single largest increase in global sexiness since Antonio Banderas waxed his chest. Using the previously established estimates for sexy, we can see that Justin Timberlake has increased sexy a whooping 3600%. <br/>

However, there is a final issue that needs to be addressed. Namely, where did sexy go in the first place? This is a deeply metaphysical question that probably no one but Justin Timberlake can answer. However, using Newtonian physics we can try and determine the distance sexy has had to travel, which can help inform as to its previous whereabouts. Using this equation I found on Wikipedia, , we can determine the distance sexy has traveled. Plugging in numbers, the answer I get is approximately 6 feet. So basically, sexy was on the other side of the couch. Interesting.