I blame Methuselah.
-Kevin
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Stanley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 2:07 PM
Subject: Generational Math
> Okay doing family history research which by the way can be seen at
> http://www.netconceptions.com <http://www.netconceptions.com> , and
stating
> to see something odd. I know that the number of ancestors a person has for
a
> particular generation doubles from the previous generation's number. So at
> the 4th generation back from me I have 8, and the 5th I have 16 and so on.
> Which leads to this. You can tell the number of ancestors you have for a
> generation by taking 2 to the (generation number minus one) power.
>
> This is all fine and dandy, but after a certain point it becomes more and
> more improbable that say after 49 generations which is about 1500 years I
> would have 562,949,953,421,312 ancestors in that generation.
>
> So what gives. Is the math suspect? Is there an inbreeding curve? Even if
> you account for like 50% cross-ancestral breeding, that still leaves a
huge
> number of people anyone is descended from going back that far. This must
> take into account the number of people on earth for the whole generational
> period in question.
>
> Anyone?
>
> John
>
>
[Todays Threads]
[This Message]
[Subscription]
[Fast Unsubscribe]
[User Settings]
- Generational Math John Stanley
- Re: Generational Math Kevin Graeme
- Re: Generational Math Ben Doom
- RE: Generational Math Philip Arnold
- Re: Generational Math Matthew Small
- RE: Generational Math Philip Arnold
- RE: Generational Math Dan Phillips
- Re: Generational Math Matthew Small
- RE: Generational Math Philip Arnold
- Re: Generational Math Charlie Griefer
- Re: Generational Math Doug White
- RE: Generational Math Philip Arnold