# Living to see the year 2100

It very well might be, they all seem to come from a group in Texas. I’ll post anything else I might be able to come up with.

zut writes:

> However, the average life expectation for a centennarian… er, centurnarian…
> er, centurion… whatever… was 1.58 years in 1900, and 2.7 years in 2001
> (Table 11). Barely a year’s increase.

But look at it this way: Say that there were 16,384 people over 100 at year X, when the average life expectation for someone over 100 is 1.6 years, and there were the same number at year Y, when the average life expectation for someone over 100 is 2.7 years. Say that at any age over 100 the same average life expectation holds. (Not true, but I’ve got to simplify this to explain it.) Then we can expect 8,192 people to live to 101.6, 4,096 to live to 103.2, 2,048 people to live to 104.8, 1,024 people to live to 106.4, 512 people to live to 108.0, 256 to live to 109.6, 128 to live to 111.2, 64 to live to 112.8, 32 to live to 114.4, 16 to live to 116.0, 8 to live to 117.6, 4 to live to 119.2, 2 to live to 120.8, and one to live to 122.4 among the group of people who are 100 in year X. On the other hand, we can expect 8,192 people to live to 102.7, 4,096 to live to 105.4, 2,048 people to live to 108.1, 1,024 people to live to 110.8, 512 people to live to 113.5, 256 to live to 116.2, 128 to live to 118.9, 64 to live to 121.6, 32 to live to 124.3, 16 to live to 127.0, 8 to live to 129.7, 4 to live to 132.4, 2 to live to 135.1, and one to live to 137.8 among the group of people who are 100 in year Y. So even if there were no more people living to age 100 in year X than in year Y, the expected maximal age in the entire population would be 15 years higher.