PrepShorts · Study sheet · Class 8 Mathematics · Chapter 1, Fractions in DisguisePrepShorts

Chapter 1 · Fractions in Disguise

Compounding: why repeated growth multiplies instead of adding

यह वीडियो हिंदी में भी · Watch in Hindi

Using percentages10 min

This video could not be loaded. Reload the page to try again.

Sign in with Google

10 min.

Also recorded in Hindi.Englishहिन्दी

Every percentage change is worked out on the value at the start of the period. One question decides everything: has that value already moved?

The idea

A percentage change is always computed on the value at the start of the period. So everything depends on whether that value is allowed to move. Take the interest out each year and the base never changes: the same rupee amount is added every time, and the total walks up a straight line, p(1 + rt). Leave the interest in and the base grows under you: each year multiplies by the same factor, and the total curves, p(1 + r)^t. The chapter's own numbers put the gap at 130% against 133.1% — and that extra 3.1% is not a mystery. It is exactly the interest earned by earlier interest, and it can be counted rupee by rupee.

What you should be able to do

  • Read a rate given as "k% p.a." and compute one period's interest on a stated principal
  • Trace both kinds of fixed deposit year by year, stating the principal at the start of each year
  • Explain why the interest is equal every year in one case and grows in the other, by naming the base each time
  • Express the total received as a percentage of the amount deposited, and as a multiplier
  • Account for the difference between the two totals as interest earned on interest, and show it summing to the printed gap
  • Write and use p(1 + rt) and p(1 + r)^t, and say which corresponds to which option
  • Apply the same two forms to a quantity that shrinks — depreciation and a declining population
  • Combine several successive percentage changes by multiplying their factors, and explain why adding the percentages is wrong
  • Recognise compounding as growth that curves and non-compounding as growth that runs straight, and compare doubling times

Words to know

TermDefinition in one lineFirst introduced
interestthe extra money paid for the use of money deposited or borrowedprinted in this chapter (Part II, §1.3, p.20)
principalthe sum the interest is worked out onprinted in this chapter (Part II, §1.3, p.21)
rate of interestthe percentage of the principal paid for one periodprinted in this chapter (Part II, §1.3, p.21)
per annumfor every year; abbreviated p.a.printed in this chapter (Part II, §1.3, p.21)
fixed depositmoney placed with a bank for a set length of time at a rate agreed in advanceprinted in this chapter (Part II, §1.3, p.20)
maturitythe end of the fixed period, when the money is returnedprinted in this chapter (Part II, §1.3, p.20, as "maturity date"; and p.21 as "maturity period")
compoundingadding each period's interest back so that it earns interest in turnprinted in this chapter (Part II, §1.3, p.22)
termone interest period of the depositprinted in this chapter (Part II, §1.3, p.23)
depreciationthe fall in an item's value because of use and ageprinted in this chapter (Part II, §1.3, p.24)
declinethe chapter's heading for value or population falling over timeprinted in this chapter (Part II, §1.3, p.24)
exponential growthgrowth by a constant factor each period, so that the graph curvesprinted in this chapter (Part II, §1.3, p.24)
linear growthgrowth by a constant amount each period, so that the graph is straightprinted in this chapter (Part II, §1.3, p.24)
growth factorthe explanation's name for the (1 + r) that one period multiplies byan added term; the chapter uses the quantity throughout and does not name it

Where people slip up

  • "10% a year for 3 years is 30%, so the two options must agree." They agree only in Option 1. Adding the rate three times and multiplying by the factor three times are different operations, and the chapter prints both expressions on Part II p.22 precisely so they can be compared.
  • "The interest rate goes up when you compound." It does not. The rate is 10% every single year in both options. What changes is the amount it is taken of.
  • "Compounding always wins." Over three years, 12% without compounding beats 10% with — that is Q6 and it is set to break exactly this belief. Compounding is a mechanism, not a magic advantage; whether it wins depends on the rate and the number of periods.
  • "A rise of 5% then falls of 2% and 3% cancel out." They very nearly do, and that is the trap. The product 0.99813 is under 1, so the population is smaller than it started. The percentages sum to zero and the factors do not multiply to one.
  • "3% then 4% is 7%." It is 7.12%. The 0.12 is the 4% acting on the 3% already added — the same interest-on-interest term as in section 7.
  • "60% of the Class 8 students is 60% of the excursion." It is 24% of the excursion. Percentages of a subgroup nest, and the rough-diagram hint the item prints is the corrective.
  • "911.25 and 912 mean somebody made a mistake." Both are right; one rounds at the end and one rounds three times. Say which and why, or students will distrust the method that gives fractional people.
  • "Depreciation is a different formula." It is p(1 − r)^t, the same machine with the sign of the change turned round. The TV and the village are the same problem as the fixed deposit.
  • "Interest is only about money." The chapter's own exercises apply the identical form to a city's population, a bacterial culture and a lab's mice.
Transcript1,309 words

Every percentage change is worked out on the value at the start of the period. So one question decides everything that follows. Is that value allowed to move? Freeze it, and the same amount gets added every time, and the total walks up a straight line. Let it move, and each period multiplies by the same factor, and the total curves away. Same rate. Same number of years. Two different answers.

And the gap between them is not a mystery. It can be counted, coin by coin. Start with one year. Six thousand deposited at ten per cent. Ten per cent of six thousand is six hundred, so the deposit becomes six thousand six hundred. Or say it in one move. A rise of ten per cent is a multiplication by one point one. Six thousand times one point one. The same six thousand six hundred.

For one year, adding the interest and multiplying by the factor agree exactly. They agree at one year for every rate there is, and that is precisely why the wrong rule survives school. Now three years, and the answer depends on which deposit was taken out. In the first, the interest is handed back to you at the end of every year, and the deposit itself comes back at the end.

In the second, the interest is left in, so it joins the pile and earns alongside it. That second one is called compounding, and it is the only difference between them. Not the rate. Not the years. Not the amount put in. Take the interest out. Year one begins at six thousand and pays six hundred. Year two begins at six thousand. Year three begins at six thousand. The base never moves, so the interest is identical every single year.

Six hundred three times is eighteen hundred, and with the six thousand back that is seven thousand eight hundred. A straight line, in equal steps. Now leave it in. Year one begins at six thousand, adds six hundred, ends at six thousand six hundred. Year two begins at six thousand six hundred, adds six hundred and sixty, ends at seven thousand two hundred and sixty. Year three begins there, adds seven hundred and twenty-six, and ends at seven thousand nine hundred and eighty-six.

Now look hard at those three payments. Six hundred, six hundred and sixty, seven hundred and twenty-six. Every one of them is ten per cent. Of six thousand, of six thousand six hundred, of seven thousand two hundred and sixty. Nothing about the rate changed. It is ten per cent all the way down. Only the number it was taken of moved. Seven thousand eight hundred against seven thousand nine hundred and eighty-six.

As a share of what went in, that is a hundred and thirty per cent against a hundred and thirty-three point one. Or as multipliers, one point three against one point three three one. And there is the whole difference, written out twice. One adds a tenth three times. The other multiplies by one point one three times. Adding the rate, or multiplying the factor. That is the entire argument.

So where do the extra one hundred and eighty-six come from? Year one pays six hundred either way. Nothing in it. Year two pays sixty more, and that sixty is ten per cent of the first year's six hundred. Year three pays a hundred and twenty-six more. Sixty and a hundred and twenty-six make one hundred and eighty-six. All of it, accounted for. Multiply out one point one cubed and the same money appears in four pieces. The six thousand, then eighteen hundred, then one hundred and eighty, then six.

The eighteen hundred is the plain interest. The hundred and eighty and the six are interest earned by interest. Written generally, take the interest out and the total is the principal, times one plus the rate times the time. Leave it in and the total is the principal, times one plus the rate, raised to the time. Now watch what those two do to a pair of banks. Twenty thousand at ten per cent for two years. Or twenty thousand at five per cent for four.

Without compounding both come to twenty-four thousand exactly, because the rate times the time is the same in each. With compounding they part. The first gives twenty-four thousand two hundred. The second gives twenty-four thousand three hundred and ten point one two five. The smaller rate over more periods ends up further ahead. And here is the belief that needs breaking. Compounding does not automatically win. Twelve and a half thousand borrowed at twelve per cent for three years, with no compounding, costs four thousand five hundred in interest.

The same sum at ten per cent compounded costs four thousand one hundred and thirty-seven and a half. The higher rate is dearer by three hundred and sixty-two and a half, and it is still dearer after four years. It takes until the fifth year for the compounded ten per cent to overtake. Over three years the higher rate simply has more to work with. Compounding is a mechanism, not an advantage. Whether it wins depends on the rate, and on how long you wait.

The same machine runs downhill without changing a single part. A television bought at twenty-one thousand loses five per cent in a year. Take the loss off, or multiply by nought point nine five. Nineteen thousand nine hundred and fifty, either way. A village of one thousand two hundred and fifty loses about a tenth of its people every decade. Multiply by nought point nine three times and you get nine hundred and eleven point two five.

But people cannot be halved, so round at each decade instead. One thousand one hundred and twenty-five, then one thousand and thirteen, then nine hundred and twelve. Nine hundred and twelve is not nine hundred and eleven point two five rounded off. It is the answer to a different procedure. Both are honest. One rounds once at the end, the other rounds three times on the way, and to the nearest ten they agree at nine hundred and ten.

None of this is really about money. Any repeated percentage change works the same way. A colony of mice rises five per cent one month, falls two the next, and falls three the next. Five minus two minus three is nothing at all, so the colony should end exactly where it started. Multiply the factors instead. One point nought five, times nought point nine eight, times nought point nine seven.

Nought point nine nine eight one three. Below one. The colony ends smaller than it began. Bus fares up three per cent one year and four the next are not up seven. They are up seven point one two. And that nought point one two is the four per cent acting on the three already added. The same interest on interest, wearing a different coat. Percentages of a group nest the same way. On an excursion, forty per cent of the students are in one year group, and sixty per cent of those are girls.

That is not sixty per cent of the excursion. Sixty per cent of forty per cent is twenty-four per cent of everybody. Finally, put the two side by side and let them run. A thousand at ten per cent. Without compounding it doubles in exactly ten years. With compounding, the eighth year is the first to clear two thousand. One of those is a straight line and the other is a curve, and now you can see which is which.

Straight lines add. Curves multiply. And the only thing separating them is whether the number underneath the percentage was allowed to move. That was the question at the start, and it was the whole question.

Where this fits

Taken from the notes each video was made from, not from the reading order — these are the ideas this one rests on and the ones that later rest on it.

Builds on

Comes up again in

Either side of this one

The book

Open in a new tab