Home » humor » A Physicist Disproves the Existence of Vampires

A Physicist Disproves the Existence of Vampires

Bela Lugosi as Dracula

Bela Lugosi as Dracula

It was bound to happen. According to University of Central Florida physics professor Costas Efthimiou, there is a simple mathematical argument against the existence of vampires. I saw it on Livescience.Com. (If you follow this link, click on slide #5 for the reference.)

According to Efthimiou, there were 536,870,911 human beings on January 1, 1600. Let us assume that the very first vampire came into existence on that day and bit one person a month so that he could sustain himself with his victim’s blood and change his victim into another vampire. By February 1, 1600, there would be two vampires; by March 1, four vampires; by April 1, eight vampires. If vampirism spread at that rate, it would take only two and a half years for the entire population of the earth to be converted into undead bloodsucking beasts. If that happened, there would be no one left to feed on.

Even if you played with the equation a bit and allowed vampires to feed less often, the constant doubling of the vampire population would have consumed the entire non-vampire population rapidly.

In the end, the proof resembles the story of the ancient king and the grains of wheat on the chessboard. If you’re interested in pursuing that tale, here is a charming re-telling of it on a Canadian website.

So when you go to bed tonight, you needn’t festoon all the entryways with wreaths of garlic. Instead, just eat the garlic. It’s good for you!

4 thoughts on “A Physicist Disproves the Existence of Vampires

  1. I thought it was a bit different. Thought that vampires had a choice — kill you or turn you into a vampire. Mostly they killed, not wanting competition. I could be wrong. However, I do believe in modern vampires — or that they make a good metaphor for what goes on in our present society. We call them psychopaths or sociopaths now and they go for gold instead of blood, but really what gold and blood are about is the “thrill” of controlling others. And zombies? Who eats brains (and has rotten brains of their own) in our times? How about Faux News and all those politicians who lie, lie, lie every time they open their mouths. They sound like they are incredibly ignorant, but are they? Who know? They certainly are doing all they can to destroy the brains of others. It’s only a theory, bu I’m just sayin’…

    I think vampires walk, and that the professor is wrong. They don’t multiply as quickly as he thinks they do — they are smarter than that.

    • There are so many sources of the vampire myth — most of them comi9ng from literature and movies. In most of them, if you get bit by a vampire, you join them. That’s true in Stoker, in the Tod Browning film, and in most of the Hammer films with Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee.

      In the metaphorical use of the term, I tend to agree with you: They definitely exist. Why, Beverly Hills is full of them!

  2. Does this equation include the rate at which the villagers drove stakes through the vampire’s hearts? What about a garlic moderation factor? Model sounds too simplistic ;)

Comments are closed.