• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
* * * * * 5 votes

Average Age of 100 validated Oldest living people


  • Please log in to reply
298 replies to this topic

#271 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 16 June 2012 - 09:02 PM

110.8 years

(70 supercentenarians)

Graph 'gets' postponed indefinitely.
  • like x 1

#272 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 27 November 2012 - 05:46 PM

110.9 years

(67 supercentenarians)
  • like x 1

#273 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:02 AM

110.8 years

(65 supercentenarians)
  • like x 2

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#274 AgeVivo

  • Guest, Engineer
  • 2,016 posts
  • 1,522

Posted 07 December 2012 - 01:54 AM

it's great that you are continuing this work from time to time. extremely interesting trend analysis!

#275 Adaptogen

  • Guest
  • 733 posts
  • 221
  • Location:United States

Posted 07 December 2012 - 03:46 AM

wow, now that is some good work

#276 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 09 March 2013 - 11:15 AM

110.7 years

(60 supercentenarians)

#277 Mind

  • Life Member, Moderator, Secretary
  • 15,564 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 09 March 2013 - 02:49 PM

I don't like the trend. I wonder if the decrease in the number of supercentenarians is a result of the SAD catching up with society. The past supers grew up on natural food. Now we are getting into the generations that have been eating more crap and living in a society with a lot more toxicity.
  • like x 1

#278 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 04 April 2013 - 07:44 PM

110.6 years

(57 supercentenarians)
  • like x 1

#279 Suirsuss

  • Guest
  • 49 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Bean Station TN

Posted 12 May 2013 - 05:14 AM

aww well that was exciting for a while... things were looking really good for youre forecast around 08 :unsure:

Edited by Suirsuss, 12 May 2013 - 05:15 AM.


#280 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 25 May 2013 - 06:23 PM

111.4 years*

*Correction(s)/Change(s):
During the last years (and especially the last months) the number of validated 110-year-olds have decreased rapidly. According to the grg.org website the receiving and the processing/validating** older cases gets more priority. At this moment there are listed (http://grg.org/Adams/E.HTM):

1 116-year-old
1 115-year-old
1 114-year-old
12 113-year-olds
13 112-year-olds
28 111-year-olds
3 110-year-olds (listed below the main list)

There is a lag in validating 110-year-olds; by the time they get validated they either are dead or turned 111 year old.
It's 'fair' to consider at least as many 110-year-olds as 111-year-olds for the average age calculation. From now on, when calculating this average age, the number of 110-year-olds will be taken equal to that of 111-year-olds.

(along with this correction) Considering that this average age is presented in 4 significant figures, i.e. e.g. 110.6 years, and that on average people are roughly 'number'.5 years old (up to now, I have added only integer years when calculating the average age) a 0.5-years (half year) addition contributed to today's age increase.

These are the corrections/changes:

1. Number of 110-year-olds = Number of 111-year-olds (28 110-year-olds were considered today),
2. +0.5 years addjustment,

[from grg.org] **The actual estimated number of worldwide living supercentenarians is more likely to be between [300 - 450] persons.

#281 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 12 June 2013 - 09:38 AM

111.3 years

#282 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 28 June 2013 - 11:22 AM

111.4 years

#283 AgeVivo

  • Guest, Engineer
  • 2,016 posts
  • 1,522

Posted 28 June 2013 - 08:57 PM

It's 'fair' to consider at least as many 110-year-olds as 111-year-olds for the average age calculation. From now on, when calculating this average age, the number of 110-year-olds will be taken equal to that of 111-year-olds.
[font='Times New Roman', ', serif} ']een [300 - 450] persons.[/font]

It is in fact fair to consider that the number of 110-years old is at least twice as much as the number of 111 year old
Indeed the death rate at those ages is >=50%. This means that the number of 110 year old 365 days ago was at best guess greater than the double of number of 111 year old today. If the number of 110 is constant or increasing (as it seems to be), the number of 110 today is even greater.

Edited by AgeVivo, 28 June 2013 - 08:57 PM.


#284 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 29 June 2013 - 02:00 PM

111.5 years*

* AgeVivo's guesstimate seems better. Therefore, in calculating the average age of 100 validated oldest living people, these are considered (http://grg.org/Adams/E.HTM):

1 115-year-old,
1 114-year-old,
11 113-year-olds,
13 112-year-olds,
30 111-year-olds,
44 110-year-olds (guesstimate).

[If it were to be done the one-month old way the average age of 100 validated oldest living people would be 111.3 years, based on:

1 115-year-old,
1 114-year-old,
11 113-year-olds,
13 112-year-olds,
30 111-year-olds,
30 110-year-olds ('one-month old' guesstimate),
14 109-year-olds (another guesstimate).]

Edited by struct, 29 June 2013 - 02:02 PM.


#285 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 18 August 2013 - 06:48 PM

111.6 years

#286 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 10 September 2013 - 12:18 PM

111.5 years

#287 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 23 October 2013 - 06:50 PM

111.6 years

#288 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 08 November 2013 - 11:33 AM

111.7 years

(There are only 6 validated living people born before the year 1900)

#289 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 17 November 2013 - 10:33 PM

111.6 years

(There are only 5 validated living people born before the year 1900)

#290 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 07 December 2013 - 02:14 PM

111.7 years

(There are only 5 validated living people born before the year 1900)

#291 Deep Thought

  • Guest
  • 224 posts
  • 31
  • Location:Reykjavík, Ísland

Posted 20 January 2014 - 03:39 PM

Interesting idea.

Are you taking the second derivative of a function to obtain that result?

#292 AgeVivo

  • Guest, Engineer
  • 2,016 posts
  • 1,522

Posted 22 January 2014 - 09:48 PM

indeed dS(t) = - r(t) S(t) + S(t) dWt so S(t) = exp(-integral r(t) dt + W(T)-W(0)) you take the second derivative, multiply by 3.1415 take the square root and add infinity and you get the first order approximation of the maximal human lifespan...
  • dislike x 1

#293 Deep Thought

  • Guest
  • 224 posts
  • 31
  • Location:Reykjavík, Ísland

Posted 23 January 2014 - 08:33 AM

indeed dS(t) = - r(t) S(t) + S(t) dWt so S(t) = exp(-integral r(t) dt + W(T)-W(0)) you take the second derivative, multiply by 3.1415 take the square root and add infinity and you get the first order approximation of the maximal human lifespan...

If you have a function describing the number of humans living to >100 years of age with respect to time and continuously updated, and differentiate this function you will get the speed at which people get to live to > 100, right? Differentiating it again will yield the acceleration of the function, which is the average rate of change pr. unit of time.

The function must have the right values.

Edited by Deep Thought, 23 January 2014 - 08:33 AM.


#294 AgeVivo

  • Guest, Engineer
  • 2,016 posts
  • 1,522

Posted 25 January 2014 - 10:00 PM

Hi Deep Thought, I had thought you were joking. No, struct counts the average top 100 from http://www.grg.org/Adams/E.HTM It is a file about validated supercentanarians that is updated every day. Given the small number of people at such ages there, a nice function to be derivated twice wouldn't represent things well.

Edited by AgeVivo, 25 January 2014 - 10:00 PM.


#295 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 23 February 2014 - 10:37 PM

111.8 years

(There are 5 people born before the year 1900)

#296 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 11 April 2014 - 03:23 PM

111.9 years

(There are 5 people born before the year 1900)



#297 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 05 June 2014 - 08:04 PM

112.0 years

 

(There are 5 people born before the year 1900)

 

  • like x 1

#298 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 27 September 2014 - 06:47 PM

112.1 years

(There are at least 6 people born before the year 1900)


  • like x 3

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#299 struct

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 561 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Albania

Posted 09 August 2016 - 12:18 PM


112 years

(There is at least 1 person born before the year 1900)

Edited by struct, 09 August 2016 - 12:44 PM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert



1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users