Using Math To Disprove Vampires

profdlpprofdlp The Holy City Of Westlake, Ohio
edited November 2006 in Science & Tech
Geometric progression points out the fallacy in believing in vampires.
Efthimiou supposed that the first vampire arose Jan. 1, 1600, around the beginning of a century during which some of the first important modern writings on vampires appeared. The researchers estimated the global population at that time, based on historical records, as 537 million.

Assuming that the vampire fed once a month and the victim turned into a vampire, there would be two vampires on Feb. 1, four the next month, and eight the month after that. All humans would be vampires within 2½ years. Humans cannot survive under these conditions, even if our population were doubling each month,” which is well beyond human capacities, Efthimiou said.
dracula-bela-lugosi-2-small-2.jpg

Sorry, Count Dracula.

Source: World Science

Comments

  • GargGarg Purveyor of Lincoln Nightmares Icrontian
    edited October 2006
    Right, but he fails to account for vampire hunters and their impact on bloodsucker population.
  • BuddyJBuddyJ Dept. of Propaganda OKC Icrontian
    edited October 2006
    That also assumes that anyone bit by a vampire turns into a vampire. All the cool kids know that becoming a vampire requires the ingestion of a vampire's blood.
  • clear_darknessclear_darkness TX New
    edited October 2006
    Quite true...don't you read or watch movies? You have to have some of the vampires blood to become a vampire...therefore...the vampire wants you to become one in order for you to be one. Frankly...if vampires made more of themselves all the time...they would lose thier scarcity.
  • profdlpprofdlp The Holy City Of Westlake, Ohio
    edited October 2006
    clear_darkness wrote:
    ...Frankly...if vampires made more of themselves all the time...they would lose their scarcity.
    I see your point. There's nothing worse than a slacker, even when it comes to vampires. :shakehead
  • QCHQCH Ancient Guru Chicago Area - USA Icrontian
    edited November 2006
    Many Vamps have feeders that they keep in a semi-zombie state. This allows them to continue to feed and never raise concern. As indicated earlier, it is NOT in the best interest of a Vamp to create any more vamps. A Single Vamp has great power. Live forever, immune to almost everything. A semi intelligent vamp would set up camp in an area that a few missing victims would not be noticed. Add a few "feeders" and the vamp maintain a stable life.

    Possible reasons to create another vampire:
    • Companionship (Someone to share the vamp life as a friend)
    • Protection (two or three vamps can be a daunting force for a normal populace)
    • Family (Thought that young vamps still feel the need to have a family...)
    • Power Grab (Overtake opposing Vamp, create an army of vamps loyal to you)

    A careless vamp is a hunted vamp. If the populace doesn't kill ya, a rival vamp will!!!!
  • profdlpprofdlp The Holy City Of Westlake, Ohio
    edited November 2006
    Entirely logical and well thought out, Q'sie. :rockon:
  • QCHQCH Ancient Guru Chicago Area - USA Icrontian
    edited November 2006
    The days of Roleplaying..... D&D, Vampire/ Werewolf, cyberpunk, GURPS, Star Trek, Star Wars... yes.... I am a retired professor of the pen, paper, and dice....

    :D
  • DaxxDaxx
    edited November 2006
    FOOLS! Vampires are nothing more than Irken drones created to extract blood from you puny humans to further our biomedical research on your pathetic race. The correct terminology for our devices are Irken HemoGoblins Model-V.

    You're primitive minds cannot withstand the truth!
  • profdlpprofdlp The Holy City Of Westlake, Ohio
    edited November 2006
    I am getting a little worried, but probably not for the reasons you might think. :eek3:
Sign In or Register to comment.