Nathan Tyree: Vampire Math
I read a very interesting article in Skeptical Inquirer last night. The authors took a fun look at the logical possibility that vampires and other popular mythological baddies exist in reality. Interestingly, they chose not to attack the biological problems with the vampire myth. They actually just left science out of the equation. Instead they used simple math and a bit of logic to assail the existence of vampires.
The authors began with the (rather conservative) estimate that a vampire would need to feed once a month. Further, they posit that each time a vampire feeds it removes one human from the population and adds one vampire. It doesn’t take long to see that this leads to a geometric progression in the growth of the vampire population (and in the shrinking of the human population). It short order (29 months or so) no humans would exist.
Given this, the authors claim that based on the Anthropic principle we can conclude that vampires do not exist.
It’s a persuasive argument. There are a few problems with it, though. They ignore human birth rates (as well as mortality rates from non-vampire related causes). I’m not really certain that it is fair to assume that each instance of vampire feeding must both kill the human prey and generate another vampire. In most of the (obviously fictional) accounts of vampirism I am familiar with the vampire will kill on a regular basis, but rarely creates a new vampire. In that sort of scenario the vampire population would remain small and the death rate from vampire would be unlikely to overwhelm the human birth rate.
This reasoning is more effective when used against mindless zombies.
Still though, it was quite a fun article.
In other news: Marvel is using their comic book characters as part of a traveling exhibit to teach kids about science. It’s in St Louis right now.
I read a very interesting article in Skeptical Inquirer last night. The authors took a fun look at the logical possibility that vampires and other popular mythological baddies exist in reality. Interestingly, they chose not to attack the biological problems with the vampire myth. They actually just left science out of the equation. Instead they used simple math and a bit of logic to assail the existence of vampires.
The authors began with the (rather conservative) estimate that a vampire would need to feed once a month. Further, they posit that each time a vampire feeds it removes one human from the population and adds one vampire. It doesn’t take long to see that this leads to a geometric progression in the growth of the vampire population (and in the shrinking of the human population). It short order (29 months or so) no humans would exist.
Given this, the authors claim that based on the Anthropic principle we can conclude that vampires do not exist.
It’s a persuasive argument. There are a few problems with it, though. They ignore human birth rates (as well as mortality rates from non-vampire related causes). I’m not really certain that it is fair to assume that each instance of vampire feeding must both kill the human prey and generate another vampire. In most of the (obviously fictional) accounts of vampirism I am familiar with the vampire will kill on a regular basis, but rarely creates a new vampire. In that sort of scenario the vampire population would remain small and the death rate from vampire would be unlikely to overwhelm the human birth rate.
This reasoning is more effective when used against mindless zombies.
Still though, it was quite a fun article.
In other news: Marvel is using their comic book characters as part of a traveling exhibit to teach kids about science. It’s in St Louis right now.
![[Valid RSS]](themes/mario-world/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
I'm sure similar rules and conditions exist in many other more serious vampire fiction.
Also, remember Bram Stroker's Dracula: Dracula could feed on a particular individual for quite some time. The victim would gradually become a vampire if he fed from her often enough, but it would take some time.