GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1268945868


From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Expected NPE's Over 800-1000 Years
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 14:57:48 -0600
References: <4c896.75d9734c.38d3ccce@aol.com> <556261.72153.qm@web53405.mail.re2.yahoo.com><013c01cac6d7$ee343e70$5e82af48@Ken1><000901cac6db$6fecae40$4fc60ac0$@com>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandy Paterson" <>

> But this isn't where it ends. In land-owning families, there will have
> been instances where a family daughtered out. I can't see a good Scotsman
> (for example) simply handing over the family estates to oblivion. So one
> of his daughters retains the surname and the husband changes his surname
> accordingly. That's not an NPE. So the 49% falls even further.

[[ It all depends on what kinds of events those estimators of NPE rates
threw into their data? They could be including the events like you
describe, or not. I haven't the slightest idea nor am I particularly
interested, as I believe the rate probably varies greatly from sub-culture
to sub-culture. But I would not have too much confidence in my Charlemagne
lineage if someone sent such a thing to me.

I was just not as optimistic as you that the general listers would study the
example and then realize that (1-p)n was meant to be (1-p) raised to the nth
power. Ken ]]




This thread: