If a woman reported, on January 15th, 1920 to have turned 36 on their last birthday, can that be the same person who died on 12-24-1953, and was 73 years of age at the time of their death?
2007-05-12 17:27:21 · 7 answers · asked by momofsix 3 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Mathematics
If she was 73 on her last birthday in 1953, then she would have likely been born in 1880 given that she died with only six days left at the end of the year.
If the document from which you ascertained her age from was the federal census, then keep this in mind. Ages were often reported wrong in the censuses. The reasons they were reported wrong are many. Sometimes, the person reporting the ages for the household simply didn't know everyones accurate age. If I had to choose between going with a persons age at the time of the census, or going with the age listed on a death certificate, I would definitely go with the death certificate. Keep in mind though that even death records can be wrong. The documents are a lot of times only as good as the person reporting the information.
2007-05-13 15:27:44 · answer #1 · answered by HSK's mama 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
She was born on February 29, 1880. Since this is leap day, when she answered the question on January 15, 1920, her last birthday would have been February 29, 1916. This is how she could have answered the question like this and still be 73 when she died on December 24, 1935.
2007-05-12 17:33:16 · answer #2 · answered by taa85 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
nope. 36 + 33 (the difference between 1953 and 1920)= 69, so no. had it been 1957, then yes.
to the person below: a person born on a leap year has only 1/4 the actual birthdays of another person. So if a person born on Feb 29 had had 73 birthdays, that person would have lived 292 years, and would have been born in the year 1660. so, yeah, i don't think so. also, in 1916, she would have had 8 birthdays, so no, i don't think it's a trick question
2007-05-12 17:32:12 · answer #3 · answered by flyaway_far 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No,If she was 36 in 1920 she would have been born in 1884 or possibly in 1883 depending on what month she was born in. If she was born in 1884 and died when she was 73. She would have died in 1957 NOT 1953.
2007-05-12 17:37:56 · answer #4 · answered by Lid 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If a person died in 1953 aged 73 they would have been born in 1880. In 1920 this person woul have been 40 years old. It sound like its two different people.
2007-05-12 17:39:25 · answer #5 · answered by fuck off 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
No, in that year the woman would not be 73 yet.
2007-05-12 17:31:35 · answer #6 · answered by bruinfan 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It never told what day she was born. I'll say no. I think the woman is 69.
2007-05-12 17:34:04 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋