That's interesting what you said about the cerebral chemistry Eric. I almost have this image of a man only feeling emotional chemistry when he feels a compelling tug on his heart and the brain in his pants AT THE SAME TIME :)

I think when it comes to love & relationship it goes hand in hand for me. If I'm not interested in their world/time I'm simply not interested in them at all.
If I'd be looking for an intimate encounter I suppose I'd only be interested in the physical, but I think that's exactly why an intimate encounter doesn't work for me.

Have other felt that way about you?
Yes. My narcissistic ex wasn't interested in me, nor in sharing his world/time with me. At first he made out to be, but that's the normal first stage of what these ppl do to get you hooked.

I belief mutual emotional chemistry is a helluva lot harder to find than mutual physical chemistry. The latter is fairly easy. The first not so much, the combination even less. Which in itself is a good thing otherwise everyone would be compatible with us. How would we choose? lol

To be honest, the first time I've experienced a genuine interest in me, my life, my past, is with the current man in my life. And yes, that was and is quite the eye-opener.
Not saying my 1st partner (not the narcissist) was a jerk, not at all. He was really quite sweet. But I think it's also a matter of growth/age from both partners. Emotionally maturity and stuff.

definitely agree ... mis perception and expectations also factor into whether chemistry is present

I am an old fashion 47 year old man that was never was married, no kids don't smoke or do no drugs your typical portuguese man that is looking for a single woman 28-49 years of age that doesn't smoke do no drugs. i have live my life very carefully, never was involved with no cops, or ever been in jail, I have always thought of the pros and cons that is why I never put myself in no situation. i have strong believes in all the decisions that I make no one can tell me different.

I'm not really sure how you are defining it in a practical sense.

I mean lets say you're with someone on a first date and you see a puppy.

If "emotional chemistry" is "interest/excitement to share your world/time with someone" does that mean:
- You both see the puppy and say "awwwww!" at the same time for the same reasons? Similar emotional associations so you want to share "world/time" to trigger similar emotions in a bonding process?
- You feel comfortable and don't really question your personal outburst of "awwwww!" you inherently trust that you can be emotionally vulnerable and expressive with them. So seek out "world/time share" for social hierarchy and acceptance, group forming.
- You're normally the type of person that tries to hide your emotional reactions behind a facade and you're looking for "chemistry" so you don't have to hide how you really feel, seeking someone that gives you permission through their indirect communication to get over your own insecurities. So seek out "world/time share" for emotional security.


Or are you defining it more like "I'm sitting here on the internet chatting with this person. I can't wait to meet them and go do things I like so I can ejaculate my emotional reactions on them, and I want to take them to do things so I can measure their reactions to see if they react how I think they should so I can determine if we have emotional chemistry."


Not based on your "loose definition" of "emotional chemistry."
If I find them physically attractive, then I'm excited to spend time with them.
Of course sometimes that time/world I want to share is just a facet of the whole and revolves around my penis and the emotions specific to that.


Possibly.
If it's a short term relationship (e.g. focused on my penis) there's not a lot of focus on determining personal feelings regarding "emotional chemistry" and no one cares, so I wouldn't try to figure out if they felt "emotional chemistry" with me later.
If it's a longer term relationship, then there is "emotional chemistry" and the time to spend figuring that out.


Maybe, depending on a less loose definition.
But from what I think I understand: Not really.
Part of what determines physical chemistry is a lot of indirect communication.
"Emotions" tend to be communicated indirectly long before they are vocalized or mostly consciously realized.

Physical attraction for men and women is based on procreation.
Who is going to provide the best DNA for babies, provide the best parenthood and therefore protection for babies, the greatest social position and therefore social security (subsequent perpetuation) for babies. (or DNA if you don't want to believe "babies)

People are social animals. Their "time/world" is defined by the groups they identify with.
Based on the "loose definition" from the op a lot of what is inherent in the question is "how much relevance does social/cultural training of emotional association play in compatibility."

That is picked up via physical attraction. Amount of makeup, laugh lines, body shape (e.g. gym vs. work body), tooth color, clean clothes, work uniform, or dirty kmart dumpster wear, haircut, facial/body hair.
e.g. like when "fat" was sexy because it represented "rich" which also represented "happy."

There is a component of "emotional chemistry" inherent in physical attraction.
Without it the attempt at dating/mating tends to be relabeled "stalking" and "clingy" and "psycho" and "too busy with work" and "bipolar" and "meathead" and "just not feeling it" and "RBF" and "skank" and "player."




Other than that, like anything else relating to human traits, one persons global emotional existence can be disseminated into may parts that someone can delude themselves into believing they can discretely isolate and idealize and say "we're compatible in all the good emotions!"


Online people form an emotional connection with their own bias.
They've filled in all the missing indirect communication with their own stereotypes, biases, prejudices, hopes, dreams, fears, ideals.
90% of what they form an emotional connection to is themselves.
The other person simply provides a shallow avatar that develops a plausible verisimilitude to a real person.
When meeting a person can either be close enough to that delusion to take over or the mating process can be strong enough to make it not matter.

When people meet in person and there's "no chemistry" it's either because:
- it was never about forming an emotional connection, just fulfilling a perceived need. (i.e. filling the hole of loneliness, find a fake relationship, following through to kill it to maintain the self image of being a good person they're not responsible it's "chemistry's" fault, so they can go back and do it again)
- the reality could never live up to the fantasy built up in one or both persons head.
- each or one person wants the other to put in more effort to make their fantasy real. They've "paid" for the relationship they want by forming the pseudo emotional bond, now it's the other persons responsibility to fulfill the bargain by doing more "real life" work to provide what was "paid" for.


And other other than that, lots of people like to sit and try to disseminate the dating and mating process as a means of discretely isolating variables in order to come up with a hierarchy of what's "harder" or "more difficult" as a means to spot a path they think they can control as a means to make themselves more "special" and therefore better than others.
e.g. Anyone that has ever said "we can lie about where we met" or people that have to work on a "story" of how they met, or want to find "true" or "real" love.

I think when it comes to love & relationship it goes hand in hand for me. If I'm not interested in their world/time I'm simply not interested in them at all.

As you know Peg, my experience is extremely limited. The few times a connection was developing between myself and a woman, I felt more emotional or intellectual resonance than physical attraction. Sometimes toward her, and sometimes from her.

This for me.

I loosely define emotional chemistry as a massive interest/excitement to share your world/time with someone and have them share their world/time with you.

Have you ever found someone physically attractive and compatible with you in a number of ways and yet not feel an emotional chemistry with them?

Or have others ever felt that way about you?

Is mutual emotional chemistry harder to find than mutual physical chemistry in your dating experiences past anf present?

Sometimes misrepresentations or misperceptions are at play as other posters suggested, but mainly I think that chemistry is affected by the growing knowledge you obtain bout them which you didnt have before

although I do very much desire that instant something that people call chemistry, I am at the same time, a bit extra cautious when I come across it.