[HPforGrownups] Re: Wizarding numbers: 24 000

[Robert Shaw]

No: HPFGUIDX 83435

o_caipora wrote:
> The detailed extrapolation of wizarding population from the number of
> Hogwarts students is like unto an attempt to recreate a dinosaur
> based on a single vertabrae.

Which can be done, sometimes. The precise shape tells up which
position it's from, and sometimes the genus too, then the size tells
you the overall size.

With mammals, it's easier. A single tooth can be enough.

>
> However terrific the science applied, the results would probably
> benefit from starting with more data.

True, but science can be very good at getting the most out
of minimal data.

We can't give exact figures but we can say that a population outside
the 10,000 to 40,000 range would make the books internally
inconsistent, and that outside the 20,000 to 30,000 range would be
a stretch.

>
> There is lots more data on the WW: the number of workers at the
> Ministry of Magic, the described size of Hogsmeade "the only all-
> wizard town in England", the commerce and infrastructure described.
>
> However, detailed analysis will be akin to taking a plate of
> bouillabaisse and attempting to reconstruct the creature from which
> it was made.

Difficult but doable.
Isotope ratios can tell us if it was carnivore, herbivore, or vegetable,
and whereabouts it lived. More can be learned from a study of the
proteins involved and, after a few decades of heavy computation,
the DNA sequence can be reconstructed, alllowing a fairly rapid
deduction of the creature or creatures' entire physiology.

Digressions aside, you are seriously underestimating the ability
of maths and science to extract data from noise.

Caipora also wrote:
>
> Some smaller number may be enough. Some primitive tribes have gotten
> by with less, but they didn't build railroads, magic or otherwise.
> The sort of robust culture shown by the wizards requires some minimum
> number, below which it can't be sustained.
>
However we don't know what contribution is made to wizarding
society by non-wizards.

We do know that the goblins provide financial services, and that
muggles probably unwittingly supply agricultural products and
other raw materials (the kind of items it's more efficient for wizards
to buy in than produce themselves).

Since we don't know what contribution non-wizards make, we
can't draw any conclusions from the number of people that would
be require to sustain wizarding society.
>
>> I think what you should have asked is how the wizarding world can
>> maintain itself intact within the Muggle world. The answer is: magic.
>
> The big problem there is that we can't do any field studies of magic-
> users. Thus, the search for a real-world analogy.
>

Consider a small town, maybe 25,000 people.

A town that size will have a distinct sense of its own identity,
even today. Once, before communication got easier, it would
have had its own culture, divergent from the national mainstream.

That town, like wizarding society, is not self-sustaining, but it
can be near enough so that most citizens don't notice the
outside traders who keep it functioning.

Mikael wrote
>> I don't think it would be a lot of trouble coming up with
>> credible explanations for whatever the actual number is, but until
>> JKR discloses the population figure, I think 24 000 wizards or
>> something in that ballpark is a useable figure.
>

Caipora replied.
> I will disagree. Whatever number she comes up with will be
> inconsistent with some aspect of the world she's described. Much as
> whatever creature you attempt to construct from the plate of
> bouillabaisse, there will be a fin or tentacle that just won't fit
> anywhere.
>
Which is when you conclude there were multiple species
present.

If there's an inconsistency present, then I'd like to pin it
down and find out just how big it is.

--
Robert