There's a scene in this film where the annoying blogger says:
"This virus has an r-nought of 2, so if 2 people have it, then 4 people have it, then 16 people have it, then 256, then 65 thousand"
I don't get how he arrived at his math. Rx refers to the number of new cases (x) an infected individual will generate during the contagious period. R2 means one person will give the virus to 2 other people..
So one person has it.. They (in this film) infect 2 others then die
2 people each give to 2, realiising 4 cases, then they die.. So far his math checks out
But then, how do 4 infected people generate 16 infected people? They only infect 2 people each.. and I'm fairly sure 4x2 is 8, not 16..
He's squaring his math.. But why? Did i miss something about R-nought when i read up on it? Did the script writers miss something? I can't believe that they did it deliberately to make him look like a misinformed sensationalist moron (even though that's his character) because noone (like the CDC director on the talk show he was opposing) then refuted his math (which would have been a logical thing to do)
His math is true, if you perform the interim steps he left out (he does 2 4 16 256 65k, all those numbers are encountered in a sequence of powers of 2) but you'd get them for an R0 of 1.1 also.. I'd have just settled on the "he skipped some steps" explanation if it hadn't been a sequence of squaring the previous term for 5 examples in a row..
"This virus has an r-nought of 2, so if 2 people have it, then 4 people have it, then 16 people have it, then 256, then 65 thousand"
I don't get how he arrived at his math. Rx refers to the number of new cases (x) an infected individual will generate during the contagious period. R2 means one person will give the virus to 2 other people..
So one person has it.. They (in this film) infect 2 others then die
2 people each give to 2, realiising 4 cases, then they die.. So far his math checks out
But then, how do 4 infected people generate 16 infected people? They only infect 2 people each.. and I'm fairly sure 4x2 is 8, not 16..
He's squaring his math.. But why? Did i miss something about R-nought when i read up on it? Did the script writers miss something? I can't believe that they did it deliberately to make him look like a misinformed sensationalist moron (even though that's his character) because noone (like the CDC director on the talk show he was opposing) then refuted his math (which would have been a logical thing to do)
His math is true, if you perform the interim steps he left out (he does 2 4 16 256 65k, all those numbers are encountered in a sequence of powers of 2) but you'd get them for an R0 of 1.1 also.. I'd have just settled on the "he skipped some steps" explanation if it hadn't been a sequence of squaring the previous term for 5 examples in a row..