[REVISION HISTORY]

Resurgence of 1960 population growth model

Updated 3 times since CLSTR started tracking revisions of this situation.

What changed

2026-10-17 20:42 UTC → 2026-10-24 20:44 UTC · added ~~removed~~

A 1960 mathematical study published in the journal Science has resurfaced on social media, drawing renewed attention to the date November 13, 2026. The paper, authored by Heinz von Foerster, Patricia M. Mora, and Lawrence W. Amiot, utilized a hyperbolic growth model to analyze historical population data. The researchers used the provocative title ‘Doomsday: Friday, 13 November, A. D. 2026’ to illustrate a mathematical singularity where population growth would theoretically approach infinity if previous trends continued without constraint. The study was intended as a mathematical experiment to demonstrate the absurdity of infinite acceleration rather than a literal prophecy of apocalypse. The model was based on 2,000 years of demographic history and the premise that human cooperation and communication accelerate growth rates beyond simple exponential patterns. The authors suggested that based on estimates from 400 B.C. to 1958, the time required for the human population to double was decreasing, potentially leading to a scenario where future generations would be ‘crushed’ by the sheer mass of people. While the model was noted for its ability to track population trends through the 1970s and 1980s, its accuracy began to decline around 1993. Modern demographic data contradicts the model’s assumptions; current United Nations projections show that global population growth rates are declining due to changing fertility rates and life expectancies. Human efforts to manage birth rates have resulted in current growth levels being approximately half of what they were in 1960, preventing the mathematical singularity predicted by the original study. Despite the model's decline in accuracy, it has maintained historical significance, having been featured in textbooks for decades and cited in a 1971 US Supreme Court case regarding population control. While the theory has gained media attention, some experts have dismissed the work as ‘ridiculous’ and ‘obviously absurd.’

Versions

Only revisions since CLSTR began indexing content versions appear here. Select a version to see what changed compared to the one before it.