Best use of maths. Ever.
Math proves that the Buffy universe harbors no more than 512 vampires
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, March 20th, 2007 at 2:12 pm and is filed under Personal.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
March 20th, 2007 at 9:43 pm
oh dear. firstly, this is a mathmatical conjecture, not proof, and secondly, the underlying assumption is wrong!
“assume, for the sake of argument, that a vampire needs to feed “only once a month”, and that in the course of feeding, the vampire turns its victim into another vampire.”
In the buffy-verse, a vampire doesn’t need to kill a human to feed from it, and it certainly doesn’t make every human it kills into a vampire.
I like where they’re coming from with the idea, but they’ve just simplified the whole thing down so that they didn’t need to know any complex maths!
Now, if they looked at it properly - from the feed rate of a vampire, the likelihood of a vampire finding someone they wanted to “turn”, they probablity that a feed equals a kill etc, it could be fab - and I have to say that I think the end equation would be very pretty indeed!
March 20th, 2007 at 9:43 pm
and yes - I accept that leaving the above comment proves my complete un-coolness!
March 21st, 2007 at 10:14 am
“In the buffy-verse, a vampire doesn’t need to kill a human to feed from it, and it certainly doesn’t make every human it kills into a vampire.”
Then change ‘feeding’ once a month to ‘turning’ once a month and the maths still works.
PS your post also proves your geekyness, but, you loose bonus points for not including any links to Wikipedia articles that support your position.
PPS Sian agrees with you. So that’s ok then. (But she gains points for cross referencing Angel episodes, but looses them all for not being able to work out how to post a comment and resorting to emailing her comments to me
)
March 21st, 2007 at 4:14 pm
Why have you got pictures now? Why don’t I have a little picture? That’s it, I’m calling my lawyer. This is nothing more than blatant tigerism.
Now how about some Star Trek nerdiness, starting with transporters and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle? See, I can wear geek along with the worst of them, even if there are some blogs that I can’t seem to post on.
Oh yes, and before you start diving for your keybords to tell me about “little pictures” I know -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avatar
And here’s another Buffy link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffy_Sainte-Marie
March 21st, 2007 at 4:26 pm
Register over at http://site.gravatar.com/ and get your own little picture set up.
PS your affection for Sainte-Marie is duely noted but I fear you might have missed the point a little.
PPS cue the crass jokes about your points and Buffy
PPPS Actually I’d prefer to point with Willow http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffy_The_Vampire_Slayer_television_show/Willow_Rosenberg
March 21st, 2007 at 4:57 pm
No - the Maths doesn’t still work. In the Buffy-verse, vampires just don’t turn that many kills into vampires (unless they are under the control of the First, or the “final battle” is coming and they need to make up their numbers).
And, the reason that I didn’t link to Wikipeadia is that I don’t think their pages on Vampire (Buffyverse) really deal with siring in enough depth for it to be relevant to this discussion!
(and yes, updating it is on my list of things to do!).
March 21st, 2007 at 5:07 pm
Kate ups her points with the first use of the phrase “Siring” but looses them again for doubting the depth (and sillyness) of (the Buffyverse sections of ) Wikipedia.
March 21st, 2007 at 5:13 pm
And Dunc ups his points for deliberately linking to the wrong pages on Wikipedia (of which, I had missed the point up to now). Clearly I’m in negative points.
Ooooh, it’s like a mini version of QI.
http://www.qi.com/ (Warning - Productivity Killer!)
March 21st, 2007 at 5:27 pm
I wasn’t doubting the depth of wikipedia… it’s that I know more than wikipedia… hang on… does that make me GOD?
March 21st, 2007 at 5:32 pm
Not according to this Wikipedia entry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God
“The name God refers to the deity held by monotheists to be the supreme reality.”
You’re clearly not connected to reality in any way, shape or form
March 22nd, 2007 at 6:08 pm
I got myself one these gravy-tar things, but now I don’t know what with it do to. However I found something else fantaaaaaastic.
I could charge money to let people watch this. What a ride.
http://www.boreme.com/boreme/funny-2007/swiss-in-fighter-plane-p1.php?vid=10026
March 25th, 2007 at 4:00 am
also - just realised that the equation didn’t take into account that vampires kill each other in the buffyverse. If one moved into a new area, they’re likely to kill any vampires that don’t want to work with them. This would mean that their maths is even more wrong!