1. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    53223
    14 Jun '10 01:23
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    This is an assumption we may or may not be able to make, depending on how the problem is intended.
    They was a drive to have more male babies in china and it certainly worked because a lot of female babies were killed at birth. Of course it came back to bite them in the asss 20 years later with a large excess of males and no females for them so they pretty much rioted so if such a drive is successful there will be repercussions down the road.
  2. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    14 Jun '10 09:13
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    Taken as a statistical problem the ratio of births is 50/50 so the law has no effect on the overall ratio (althought the birth rate will reduce to less than 2 per couple and hence the population will decrease)
    An interesting follower to the original question:

    If every woman give birth to so many as she is allowed to do, i.e. until the first baby girl is born - (We're agreed that in the long run, the same number of boys as girls are born) - how many babies will the women give birth to on average in the country, in the long run?
  3. Standard memberPalynka
    Upward Spiral
    Halfway
    Joined
    02 Aug '04
    Moves
    8702
    14 Jun '10 12:30
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    This is an assumption we may or may not be able to make, depending on how the problem is intended.
    The only "assumption" is assuming the problem is solvable with the information provided.

    My statement is then an outcome.
  4. Joined
    07 Sep '05
    Moves
    35068
    14 Jun '10 14:401 edit
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    An interesting follower to the original question:

    If every woman give birth to so many as she is allowed to do, i.e. until the first baby girl is born - (We're agreed that in the long run, the same number of boys as girls are born) - how many babies will the women give birth to on average in the country, in the long run?
    (Assuming the idealised case is that straightforward - and we're not worriying about potentially immortal mothers with hundreds of sons...)

    The expected number would be:

    0.5 + 2(0.5)^2 + 3(0.5)^3 + ...

    I believe SUM{i = 1 to infinity}(i.x^i) = x/(1 - x)^2

    Which gives us....(drum roll)....

    2.
  5. Standard memberTheMaster37
    Kupikupopo!
    Out of my mind
    Joined
    25 Oct '02
    Moves
    20443
    14 Jun '10 14:44
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    An interesting follower to the original question:

    If every woman give birth to so many as she is allowed to do, i.e. until the first baby girl is born - (We're agreed that in the long run, the same number of boys as girls are born) - how many babies will the women give birth to on average in the country, in the long run?
    Scenario 1 in my second post to this thread 🙂

    1 child with chance 1/2
    2 children with chance 1/4
    3 with chance 1/8
    4 with chance 1/16
    ...

    Gives a total of

    1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + ...
    + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + 1/32 +...
    + 1/8 + 1/16 + 1/32 + ...
    ...

    Which is
    1
    + 1/2
    + 1/4
    ...

    Which is 2.
  6. Joined
    07 Sep '05
    Moves
    35068
    14 Jun '10 15:54
    I was thinking there ought to be an "inituitive" way of reaching that answer, rather than calculating infinite series. Here it is:

    In this scenario, all families will, eventually, have one girl. Therefore, quite clearly, the average number of girls per family is one.

    But we've already realised the proportion of boys to girls is still 50-50. So it must be true that the average number of boys per family is also one.

    So the average family size = 1 + 1 = 2.
  7. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    14 Jun '10 16:30
    Originally posted by TheMaster37
    Which is 2.

    Originally posted by mtthw
    So the average family size = 1 + 1 = 2.
    So the law of the emperor doesn't change the ratio beween boys and girls, not even in the long run.
    And the nativity of 2 per woman isn't worse than many of the western countries.

    Clever emperor...
  8. Standard memberPalynka
    Upward Spiral
    Halfway
    Joined
    02 Aug '04
    Moves
    8702
    14 Jun '10 16:58
    Originally posted by mtthw
    I was thinking there ought to be an "inituitive" way of reaching that answer, rather than calculating infinite series. Here it is:

    In this scenario, all families will, eventually, have one girl. Therefore, quite clearly, the average number of girls per family is one.

    But we've already realised the proportion of boys to girls is still 50-50. So it must ...[text shortened]... the average number of boys per family is also one.

    So the average family size = 1 + 1 = 2.
    Very nice.
  9. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Quiz Master
    RHP Arms
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    48793
    14 Jun '10 17:15
    Originally posted by mtthw
    (Assuming the idealised case is that straightforward - and we're not worriying about potentially immortal mothers with hundreds of sons...)

    The expected number would be:

    0.5 + 2(0.5)^2 + 3(0.5)^3 + ...

    I believe SUM{i = 1 to infinity}(i.x^i) = x/(1 - x)^2

    Which gives us....(drum roll)....

    [b]2
    .[/b]
    The ONLY way to get the average figure of 2 is IF we have immortal women with hundreds of sons. Otherwise the average is less than two and the population declines as I said earlier.

    For instance lets limit the women to 8 sons.

    Then we have 1 + 1/2 + 1/4 + ..... + 1/128 = 1 127/128
    =approx 1.99 children per couple
  10. Joined
    07 Sep '05
    Moves
    35068
    14 Jun '10 21:07
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    The ONLY way to get the average figure of 2 is IF we have immortal women with hundreds of sons.
    I know - that's what I meant about "not worrying about it" - since that answer assumes something that cannot possibly be true.
  11. Standard memberforkedknight
    Defend the Universe
    127.0.0.1
    Joined
    18 Dec '03
    Moves
    16687
    14 Jun '10 22:21
    If we assume a practical limit of 4 children per family, that means the population will decrease at a rate of 15 children for every 16 parents.
  12. Joined
    15 Feb '07
    Moves
    667
    15 Jun '10 23:35
    Every birth is an independent event with the same odds of boy births, so this law won't have any significant effect.

    I thought families which only ever have boys might raise the boy-to-girl ratio a little, but it ends up it doesn't.

    Assumptions:
    * 50% of births will be boys.
    * All families obey the law.
    * No baby girl gets killed purposefully. (I know, not realistic..)
    * Families will continue to have children until they cannot, or they have 5 children.

    Out of 32 families I arrive at the following numbers.

    1 girl, 0 boys - 16 families
    1 girl, 1 boy - 8 families
    1 girl, 2 boys - 4 families
    1 girl, 3 boys - 2 families
    1 girl, 4 boys - 1 family
    5 boys - 1 familiy

    Girls - 16 + 8 + 4 + 2 + 1 = 31
    Boys - 8x1 + 4x2 + 2x3 + 1x4 + 1x5 = 8 + 8 + 6 + 4 + 5 = 31


    The point has been made above though, that this law will likely be effective for one reason... While half the conceptions will still be girls, many, many more of them will die before they are born (or just afterwards), because prospective parents will want to have more children and will thus sacrifice their girls to prevent being forbidden to have more children.
  13. Joined
    26 Apr '03
    Moves
    26771
    02 Jul '10 22:543 edits
    Assuming each family continues having children until forbidden, then each sequence will end in a girl, therefore we have:

    G (1/2)
    BG (1/4)
    BBG (1/8)
    BBBG (1/16)


    total girls = 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + ... = sum(n=1..infinity) of 1/2^n
    total boys = 1/4 + 2/8 + 3/16 + 4/32 + ... = sum(n=1..infinity) of n/2^(n+1)
    which works out as total_boys = 1

    So the ratio of boys to girls remains 1 to 1!
  14. Joined
    26 Apr '03
    Moves
    26771
    04 Jul '10 21:26
    I liked this proof too, that I came up with today when explaining this puzzle to my wife.

    Ist child of any family can be boy/girl
    2nd child of any family can be boy/girl
    3rd child of any family can be boy/girl
    etc.

    hence, same number of boys as girls.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree