/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.6048590]

On a scale of 1 to I'm fucked, how meaningful is IQ when it comes to being a scientific thinker?

[Anonymous No.6048595]

If you can think, you'll be fine

[Anonymous No.6048594]

>>6048590
If you can't get at least a 130, you're doomed to be ridiculed by your peers. You're fucked.

[Anonymous No.6048596]

Considering you had to make this thread, your fucked.

[Anonymous No.6048597]

Feynman's IQ was 97 OP

[Anonymous No.6048598]

>>6048597
> bongos

[Anonymous No.6048602]

>>6048590
Above a 100 is minimum; after 120 it's pointless. There's more to math/science than blind pattern recognition

[Anonymous No.6048604]

This is why the cancelled the shuttle program.

Damn thing kept getting stuck in a cloud. They'd have to send a tow-helicopter to pull it out.

[Anonymous No.6048607]

>>6048604

[Anonymous No.6048610]

>>6048602
Eh... it's not that bad a measurement.

Higher IQ correlates to better job performance at every level. It is only a correlation, though.

[Anonymous No.6048613]

>>6048596
>your
not as much as you, bud

[Anonymous No.6048616]

>>6048597
In his book he said it was 126. Why do you think it's 97?

[Anonymous No.6048619]

>>6048604
i like literally lold out loud

[Anonymous No.6048622]

>>6048616
because everyone adds to their actual IQ, and the mean exaggeration is 29

[Anonymous No.6048623]

>>6048604
It gets even more expensive when the chopper gets stuck, usually takes a crane to get it out

[Anonymous No.6048625]

>>6048616
because everyone adds to their actual IQ, and the mean exaggeration is 31

[Anonymous No.6048630]

>>6048607

[Anonymous No.6048633]

>>6048630

[Anonymous No.6048642]

IQ tests were designed to test for mild to severe deficits in cognitive abilities. As far as detecting a "genius" level ability in cognition, I'd be skeptical of their accuracy. As long as you're above or around 100, you should be fine.

[Anonymous No.6048769]

>do one iq test
>127
>do another
>109

127 it is.

[Anonymous No.6048780]

>take iq test as 10 year old, 85
>take iq test as 17 year old 137
>take iq test at 18 and suddenly 130.

Statistically, it is improbable that im getting stupid over time.
But not impossible. What causes test scores to vary so much?
Also, having a higj IQ doesnt prove how smart you are. Just how smart you could be, given that your mind can read patterns and make connections easier than people of lower IQs. Hence, the teacher who says "He is so smart, if only he would apply himself" is in a sense very correct. application is a much better factor than purely IQ.

[Anonymous No.6048790]

>>6048590
Hard work triumphs IQ. So long as you're not sucking door knobs you will be fine.

[Anonymous No.6048791]

yes, IQ is very important to having intelligence.
if you want to do science, you need to have maximum IQ points.

[Anonymous No.6048965]

>>6048602
>blind pattern recognition

[Anonymous No.6048981]

>>6048780
Did you forget to eat breakfast before your 3rd IQ test? IQ tests aren't always a good indicator of intelligence, rather it's an indicator of your ability to think at the time of the test.

[Anonymous No.6048985]

These are my results from an IQ test taken at age 17. What do all the different categories mean and am I fucked? Can I succeed in Physics or engineering or should I just quit and go full NEET while it's still super easy to get welfare?

[Anonymous No.6048990]

>>6048965
>mfw blind recognition

[Anonymous No.6049033]

It depends on your field of study for one, aka what's available. Many people get shoehorned into little niches early on, because there are so many other people studying almost the exact same thing that they need some little gimmick to claim for themselves. Academic or not, important research is closely protected, so it's possible to get beaten to the chase by some other guys even if you think you're in the clear, so, the more focused you get, the better the odds that you won't have your thunder stolen by the time it's ready.

Odds are that your niche knowledge will be put to use along with a bunch of other peoples', in helping a large project (one outside the scope one man can reasonably do). Hence it's mostly the P.Is for these projects who need to make real fucking sure that they aren't on some wild goose chase, or that at the very least -something- interesting should come up even if they don't find what they hoped for. On that, becoming a P.I is more of a seniority thing than an intellect thing, especially in Europe and Asia, so again intellect won't give you a free pass past any of this stuff, because no matter how smart you think you are, your colleagues aren't exactly boneheads either and so won't be all that impressed, and won't just bow down even if you're obviously sharper, because if you're younger there are still background pools of knowledge/experience and minimum publication levels mandating certain types of respect. People won't just look at how much you published, but what journals you're good enough for, your paper citations etc, and again intellect doesn't matter much here, just prestige/luck of the draw (even an ingenius, useful paper might still get hardly any cites). Also because peer review is arbitrary you could be shut out of prestigious journals for being perceived as a noob, even if the paper is sound, because peer review is the devil.

This is all for science mind you, for math I'm not sure if there's a similar established hierarchy.

[Anonymous No.6049075]

>>6048590
I would lookat your college grades as a more meaningful measure than iq.

[Anonymous No.6049229]

>>6049075
Are you claiming that intelligence is not meaningful?

[Anonymous No.6049232]

Id be happy travelling through the South American jungle recording new species for a science blog i run.

Im sure ill be fine.