As explained on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1lyggPhWOM
so it is certain to grow exponentially for rthe first steps, petering out with high number of steps as the choice of susceptibles shrinks. how mant steps have there been so far?
so it is certain to grow exponentially for rthe first steps, petering out with high number of steps as the choice of susceptibles shrinks. how mant steps have there been so far?
Better to say that there is only ever sub-exponential growth. The usual reductio ad absurdum argument is that at some point there are more infected than people. Or, as Buzz Lightyear likes to say, to infinity and beyond.
Exponential growth can be seen to come out of the standard model when the R number is constant. i.e. it has been simplified to the stage that it is unnatural. If anyone wants to argue that it can change direction at some point then you'll get a model with a discontinuity in the derivative which is quite unnatural outside of phenomena like shock waves.
As explained on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1lyggPhWOM
Choosing a small population for his basic sums, allows the herd immunity to reached very quickly. He should do it for a population equating to a large city, then consider the time frame for each infection/recovery cycle. Then you will get an estimate of reality.
His trivial sample size is selected to deceive.
so it is certain to grow exponentially for rthe first steps, petering out with high number of steps as the choice of susceptibles shrinks. how mant steps have there been so far?
Better to say that there is only ever sub-exponential growth.
In any case sub-exponential growth is eaily enough to swamp any practical sort of affordble health system.
