Jedinica Vrijstaat

[lucky22]

"Viðv. 1) Treytað frádøming af koyrikorti fyri promillukoyring

Sambært § 59a à uppskotinum verður nú møguligt at fáa treytaða frádøming av koyrikortinum hjá persóni, ið er tikin fyri promillukoyring."

This quote is from a Danish article (I think Danish, anyway) which included the term "promillan"as well as the prefix "promill-" seen above. The term was being used in a statistical context, but I can't suss the precise meaning. You Euro guys are something else with your english- I'm more impressed the more I get my butt kicked by this stuff.

[Micha]

btw: Yesterday I saw a large group of Morganite tourists who took pictures of each other standing in front of the 35m high giant Xenobrew-advertisment...
That´s Morgan´s taste, I think...

[Maniac]

Are you sure that formula is correct, Lucky??? I did some testing.

To determine the total growth over a certain period:

My total formula:
[(Last Figure - First figure) / (First Figure)] * 100
For Sheathed Sword nutrients:
[(7-6)/6] * 100 = 16.67
Check: 6 + 6*0.166 = 7

Your total formula:
(1-[First Figure/Last Figure])*100
For Sheathed Sword nutrients:
[1-(6/7)] * 100 = 14.29
Check: 6 + 6*0.1429 = 6.86

Mine seems correct. To determine the average annual growth however, my formula doesn't work. I already tested yours, and unfortunately it doesn't seem to work either.

To determine the annual growth:

My annual formula:

[Last Figure - First figure) / (First Figure)] * 100 / # of years

For Sheathed Sword nutrients:
[(7-6)/6] * 100 / 4 = 4.1666...
Year 0: 6 nutrients
Year 1: 6 * 1.04167 = 6.25
Year 2: 6.25 * 1.04167 = 6.51
Year 3: 6.51 * 1.04167 = 6.78
Year 4: 6.78 * 1.04167 = 7.06

As expected, every year the difference between the expected and calculated number increases, making the formula completely inadequate for determining the average annual growth for longer periods of time.

Your annual formula:
((1-[First Figure/Last Figure])/[# of years])*100
(Did I put the extra brackets right?)

For Sheathed Sword nutrients:
[(1-[6/7])/4] * 100 = 3.57
Year 0: 6 nutrients
Year 1: 6 * 1.0357 = 6.21
Year 2: 6.21 * 1.0357 = 6.44
Year 3: 6.44 * 1.0357 = 6.67
Year 4: 6.67 * 1.0357 = 6.90

So here the end number is lower than the number we should get, around 7. Did I do anything wrong??

[Maniac]

"Promillian" is actually an adjective I invented myself. I don't know if it exists in English. In Dutch the substanstif "promille" is used. Anyway, for its meaning, it's very simple.

Pro centum (Latin) -> Pour cent (French) -> Percent(ual) (English)
Pro millia (Latin) -> Promille (Dutch/Fr.?) -> (my neologism) Promillian
Whereas "centum" means hundred and "millia" means thousand in Latin.
Though percentages are used most of the time, for things such as population, figures on thousand, especially when dealing with birth and starvation rates, are more frequent here.

[lucky22]

Originally posted by Maniac
Are you sure that formula is correct, Lucky??? I did some testing.

To determine the total growth over a certain period:

My total formula:
[(Last Figure - First figure) / (First Figure)] * 100
For Sheathed Sword nutrients:
[(7-6)/6] * 100 = 16.67
Check: 6 + 6*0.166 = 7

Your total formula:
(1-[First Figure/Last Figure])*100
For Sheathed Sword nutrients:
[1-(6/7)] * 100 = 14.29
Check: 6 + 6*0.1429 = 6.86

Check: 6+7*0.1429=7.0003

Year 7 is the actual baseline for my formula. It is retrocative and not predictive, which leads us to...

To determine the annual growth:

My annual formula:

[Last Figure - First figure) / (First Figure)] * 100 / # of years

For Sheathed Sword nutrients:
[(7-6)/6] * 100 / 4 = 4.1666...
Year 0: 6 nutrients
Year 1: 6 * 1.04167 = 6.25
Year 2: 6.25 * 1.04167 = 6.51
Year 3: 6.51 * 1.04167 = 6.78
Year 4: 6.78 * 1.04167 = 7.06

Here's a major clue...

As expected, every year the difference between the expected and calculated number increases, making the formula completely inadequate for determining the average annual growth for longer periods of time.

The rate of growth isn't linear. We need an integral to estimate the actual number at a given year.

Your annual formula:
((1-[First Figure/Last Figure])/[# of years])*100
(Did I put the extra brackets right?)

For Sheathed Sword nutrients:
[(1-[6/7])/4] * 100 = 3.57
Year 0: 6 nutrients
Year 1: 6 * 1.0357 = 6.21
Year 2: 6.21 * 1.0357 = 6.44
Year 3: 6.44 * 1.0357 = 6.67
Year 4: 6.67 * 1.0357 = 6.90

So here the end number is lower than the number we should get, around 7. Did I do anything wrong??

In order to be "predictive" my formula needs to be recalculated using 6.21 rather than 6 at year 1 and so on. Could get tedious. If we have the formula for nutrient production handy (that would actually be a lot of work) we can do an integral setting X to be time and Y to be nutrients- if there isn't any neckbreaking trigonometry involved ( ) then we'll have a handy computing formula for any given year... that result will differ from the average annual growth by definition.

Pro millia (Latin) -> Promille (Dutch/Fr.?) -> (my neologism) Promillian

D'oh!! Thanks. We'd go with "per thousand". We (well, I, certainly) forget that "percent" comes from somewhere other than mom.

[Maniac]

Thanks for the explanation!

The rate of growth isn't linear. We need an integral to estimate the actual number at a given year.

Integrals! My my, and I thought it would be some simple formula to take the exponential (or whatver you have to call it) growth into account.
/me tries to remember the math of last year.

if there isn't any neckbreaking trigonometry involved

Oh my. I heard just today I have 20/20 on my statistics exam ( ), but I'm clearly far from an expert.

that result will differ from the average annual growth by definition.

What would it give then? I'm looking for some formula to be able to calculate what's the total percentual growth in food/mineral/energy production and population during my governorship (which can be done by my simple formula), and besides that being able to say what the annual percentual growth is up until now. I would put these figures under the "Population and economic overview" in my first post.

[moomin]

Originally posted by lucky22
"Viðv. 1) Treytað frádøming af koyrikorti fyri promillukoyring

Sambært § 59a à uppskotinum verður nú møguligt at fáa treytaða frádøming av koyrikortinum hjá persóni, ið er tikin fyri promillukoyring."

This quote is from a Danish article (I think Danish, anyway)

Actually, it's Icelandic. Way, way cooler.

[lucky22]

Originally posted by Maniac
Thanks for the explanation!



Integrals! My my, and I thought it would be some simple formula to take the exponential (or whatver you have to call it) growth into account.
* Maniac tries to remember the math of last year.

If I wrote out rather than implied the the formula then it would be no big deal, probably. I am unable to write it out right now, so who's the doofus?

Oh my. I heard just today I have 20/20 on my statistics exam ( ), but I'm clearly far from an expert.

Right on... if you choose to spend time on it, you will of course master it.

What would it give then?

It would give the growth rate for that individual year. The growth actually occurs on a curve. The average for a single year implies a (falsely) linear relationship between time and quantity of nutrients.

I'm looking for some formula to be able to calculate what's the total percentual growth in food/mineral/energy production and population during my governorship (which can be done by my simple formula), and besides that being able to say what the annual percentual growth is up until now. I would put these figures under the "Population and economic overview" in my first post.

Either report the average annual rate, which isn't all that misleading, recalculate the formula for each year relative to the previous year, or else plot the growth curve and determine the rate of change at each year by finding the slope of the tangent line for the point representing that year on the graph. Reporting results on the second two will not be very compact and non-constant rates of change are kind of esoteric anyway.

My advice would be to report the average annual rate, and if it reflects positively on your governorship an average increase in the annual rate, based on the recalulation method.

[lucky22]

Originally posted by moomin


Actually, it's Icelandic. Way, way cooler.

...

[Method]

Micha: WTF? did someone relocate Xenobrew Inc.'s head office without my knowledge? geez, i have to pay more attention

maniac, i'm thinking of moving the Central Foreign Affairs Complex to somewhere remote and mysterious. Mt Centauri is a candidate, along with an platform in the middle of the FWC

[GeneralTacticus]

.... eh? Why would you want to move the Foreign Affairs Complex? It belongs to me, remember?

[Micha]

Originally posted by TKG
Micha: WTF? did someone relocate Xenobrew Inc.'s head office without my knowledge? geez, i have to pay more attention

Actually, it´s not the head office, it´s just the Pandemonium xenobrew building...

Hm, what do you think, shall I buy more of this street artist´s stuff??? Or shall I use the money to "test" the quality of xeno inc.´s alcoholic products?

[Method]

look, i meant INTERNAL affairs

[Pandemoniak]

Pro centum (Latin) -> Pour cent (French) -> Percent(ual) (English)
Pro millia (Latin) -> Promille (Dutch/Fr.?) -> (my neologism) Promillian

?!

No, in French, we say "pour mille", like we say "pour cent".

[Micha]

Originally posted by Pandemoniak
No, in French, we say "pour mille", like we say "pour cent".

And in German it is "Promille", like it is "Prozent". Are you quite sure it doesn´t exit in English, too?