Population formula part 1: Birth

In summary, the conversation discusses a formula involving pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, stillbirth rate, time breastfeeding, average generation length, multiples, and average number of pregnancies. The conditions for the formula include having plenty of food and water, cosmic ray protection, and only using specific types of light. The starting population is 45,000 with an average pregnancy rate of 80% per year and a 1:1 sex ratio. The miscarriage rate is 15% and the stillbirth rate is 1%. The time breastfeeding is 2 years and the average generation length is 20 years. The average number of pregnancies per woman is 11. Multiples are also taken into consideration, with a 3% chance of twins
  • #1
caters
229
9
I need my formula checked. It involves pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, stillbirth rate, time breastfeeding, average generation length, multiples, and average number of pregnancies. So let's start off with the conditions:

Plenty of food and water for millions
Cosmic ray protection
Only lights used are infrared, visible, UVA, and UVB
Monogamy

So first off the starting population is around 45,000. While some are subfertile, some are infertile, and some are fertile or super fertile(mainly the young ones like teens that are super fertile), the average pregnancy rate on the generation ship is 80% per year. Since there is a 1:1 sex ratio I am left with a total percentage of 40% of the population who are pregnant. That is the same as the 80% of women I calculated earlier.

Miscarriage rate is 15% on average. So per year that is 2,700 miscarriages. Stillbirth rate is 1% on average. This is a further 180 stillbirths. So only 64% of pregnancies would actually have a baby survive after birth. For simplification, I will ignore premature birth rates and assume on the generation ship, there is technology to keep the baby in until full term. So 15,120 full term babies.

The time breastfeeding is 2 years. Again, for simplification, I will assume no pregnancies for 2 years. Average generation length is 20 years, the youngest ideal age for pregnancy. Average age at menopause is 50 years so that is on average about 11 pregnancies per woman.

So next up is multiples. 3% of pregnancies would be twins(so 540 twin pregnancies every 2 years 9 months). Natural triplet pregnancies are .01%(so just 18 triplet pregnancies every 2 years 9 months)

Quad rates would be so low that I won't take them into consideration in annual birth rate(.02 quads every 2 years 9 months is low, that means that for a woman in the population to have quads, it would take on average 5.75 years or in other words that there would only be 5 quad pregnancies in 20 years)

Quintuplets, the same but even more extreme. This is the highest order multiples I could find a natural conception rate for. That rate is 1 in 55 million. Even with the 80% pregnancy rate, it is simply too low for a quintuplet pregnancy to occur within 1 generation. It would take 278 generations or more than 8000 years for there to be 1 quintuplet pregnancy. It simply isn't going to happen without inter-galactic travel at a reasonable generation ship speed or fertility treatment or just sheer luck.

With that out of the way, I have figured out that for the number of pregnancies that have at least 1 baby survive after birth in 1 generation, this would be the formula:

$Pregnancies=Populationi∗0.5∗0.8∗.64*11$

Now for the # of babies I would take that and divide it by percentage singletons, twins, triplets, and quads.

$Babies=(.96[8]*Pregnancies+(.03*Pregnancies*2)+(.001*Pregnancies*3)+20)=209,374$

So annual birth count would average to be 6,979 per year in the first generation.

But is all this complicated math correct assuming that all the rates and simplifications are true and no fertility treatment is done(in other words 100% natural conception)? Or did I make a mistake somewhere in the math? By the way, I put the 8 in brackets because it is the repeating part of a repeating decimal.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
A few thoughts.

1) This is a very simplistic model. No "complicated math".
2) Your attention to some details and not to others exposes the lack of sophistication in the mathematics, itself. (Number of decimal places, excessive precision, just to name two.)
3) A linear model of any concoction is unlikely to represent the generation model of any species I'm aware of.

Having said that, we must remember the great statistical mantra, "All models are wrong, but some are useful." Give this a good read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_models_are_wrong
 
  • #3
tkhunny said:
A few thoughts.

1) This is a very simplistic model. No "complicated math".
2) Your attention to some details and not to others exposes the lack of sophistication in the mathematics, itself. (Number of decimal places, excessive precision, just to name two.)
3) A linear model of any concoction is unlikely to represent the generation model of any species I'm aware of.

Having said that, we must remember the great statistical mantra, "All models are wrong, but some are useful." Give this a good read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_models_are_wrong

Well it may be that it is non-linear. But humans would be the closest to linear. And it is complicated in a way. All the factors I took into it. And no that precision is not excessive and no the number of decimal places is not wrong. But with these numbers, I find scientific notation just makes the whole thing a lot more confusing than it is worth. I mean saying $1*10^-5$ just to say .001%? It's not worth it. And I justified all my simplifications, namely that assuming there is technology to keep the baby in until full term and assuming that becoming pregnant while breastfeeding is wrong on so many levels(which I really think it is, thus the 2 years 9 months between pregnancies).

And again, the details that I paid attention to are super important. Like miscarriages and stillbirths. Women with these would likely be too upset to have another baby for a long time. Multiples can significantly change the population within 30 years compared to assuming 100% singletons and makes it more realistic. Ones I didn't pay attention to either aren't important for these formulas or are so insignificant across the time scale that I might as well not add that complexity.

Infant mortality is 1 of those. So insignificant on a generation ship with futuristic technology and the ability to grow limbs and organs, all from iPS cells with the patient's DNA and self-antigens, that it might as well be non-existent. Difference between infertile, fertile, and super fertile is again another insignificant factor because only 1% of the initial population are infertile and teens(the most likely age group to be super fertile) also make up a minority in the initial population. So they aren't nearly as important as the average pregnancy rate of 80% of women or 40% of the population.
 

1. What is the population formula for calculating birth rate?

The population formula for calculating birth rate is: (Number of births in a period / Average population during the same period) x 1,000. This formula gives the number of births per 1,000 people in a population.

2. What data is needed to calculate the birth rate using this formula?

To calculate the birth rate, you will need the number of births that occurred during a specific period of time and the average population during the same time period. This data can be obtained from official government records or surveys.

3. How is the birth rate used in population studies?

The birth rate is an important factor in population studies as it helps to determine the growth rate of a population. It is also used to track changes in population trends over time and can provide insights into a population's age structure and fertility patterns.

4. What are some limitations of using the birth rate formula?

One limitation of using the birth rate formula is that it assumes a constant population size and does not take into account factors such as migration and mortality. Additionally, the accuracy of the birth rate calculation can be affected by incomplete or inaccurate data.

5. How can the birth rate formula be used to make predictions about future population growth?

By analyzing the birth rate over time, researchers can make predictions about future population growth. A high birth rate indicates a growing population, while a low birth rate suggests a declining population. This information can be used to inform policy decisions and plan for future resource needs.

Similar threads

  • General Math
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
849
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • General Math
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top