/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.9751971]

I study math at a university and I've been doing brilliantly - despite the fact I always score low on IQ tests. Seriously, some of my non-intellectual trucker friends get higher scores than me and we always joke about it.

I personally think I'm a Chris Langan -tier individual because I can almost feel the deepest fabric of our reality but there's no test out there that measures the cognitive ability that I have. IQ tests only measure a certain type of cognitive ability.

[Anonymous No.9751984]

I've built my own mass spectrometer from scratch and the online IQ test with a gray background (the hard one) gave me a score of 108.
Sigh:
I guess I'm a fucking normie and I should go back to watching football and dreaming about tits and ass.

[Anonymous No.9751994]

This is why people dumber than me ace IQ tests.

IQ tests assume the most obvious choice is always right.
But what's obvious to the layman is a false assumption to me.

[Anonymous No.9752192]

>>9751971
> IQ tests only measure a certain type of cognitive ability.
They measure your capacity to recognize patterns and reason in an abstract manner - which is what mathematics boils down to.

In short, you are either an imbecile or a tiresome troll.

[Anonymous No.9752200]

>>9751971
I get A's in math but if someone tried to explain it to me I wouldn't know.

If you're good at doing practice problems and have good test taking skills, you can get through the calc track at least

[Anonymous No.9752205]

[Anonymous No.9752208]

>>9752205
>the chad answer
Kek

[Anonymous No.9752321]

>low-IQ peasant trying to blame IQ tests for the bad scores he gets.

Lmao. I'm a Computer Scientist and have scored 134 (SD 15) in official Mensa's test. How's that make you feel?

[Anonymous No.9752357]

>>9751994
is this a level of bait so high its real?

[Anonymous No.9752389]

>>9752205
>>9752208
Chad here. Here's my answer.

[Anonymous No.9752715]

>>9752321
>I'm a Computer Scientist and have scored 134

People who score well are the same people who insist it's a good test. What a fucking surprise.

My IQ is 110 and I'm going to revolutionize modern physics and laugh at all the IQ 160 chessmasters who didn't accomplish shit in their lives because their autism prevents them from seeing big pictures.

[Anonymous No.9752725]

OP here.
I'm still standing behind my claim that I'm too creative and too much of an "out-of-the-box" thinker for these block tests.

Here's a sample of my logic. I always, ALWAYS have a complex, sound logic behind my IQ test answers but I get them wrong because the author of the test is a block thinker and assumes everyone else is a damn ape too.
I never guess my answers either. There's always a logic, so it's unfair that I get low scores if the answer can be justified.

99,9999% of you guys woul'd ve gone with the original answer on this one but you forgot to see more. I see so much stuff in this realm you wouldn't believe.

[Anonymous No.9752733]

>>9752321
>official Mensa's test
>Mensa

Is Mensa's only function to be an elitist club where autists sniff their own farts and act like they're better than everyone else?

If I was offered Mensa membership, I'd turn it down. I might consider Chris Langan's club though, they only allow >164 IQ folks in.

[Anonymous No.9752734]

ITT IQ dicksuckers are seething

[Anonymous No.9752745]

Emotional intelligence is more important.

[Anonymous No.9752823]

IQ is not everything, and the tests aren't 100% accurate. Of course not. What kind of idiot believes we'd have an objective means of measuring our minds? You could write a book on the subject so I'll just say this:

Why is it that the people with the highest IQ's never really contribute anything to science and don't invent anything new?

Because IQ isn't everything. And from what I've seen, the most "intelligent" individuals are so autistic and robot-like that they almost disintegrate from their own computing power. Like putting a Ferrari engine in a 90's Toyota. It just falls apart, barely runs, but sure, it's powerful.
These people are good at playing chess, programming, calculating stuff. Just give a computer to one of these freaks and be amazed. But do they come up with new physics? Nah. Like I said, autistic tendencies usually follow from being a robothead. This leads to them focusing intensely on small details in life, like mastering chess, building something insane out of legos and stuff. Their brain power is completely wasted on obscure and insignificant doodling. If you're in the 130-170 range you have the best odds at actually accomplishing something. All the best scientists from the past 2 centuries have been in that range. There was even a famous physicist whose IQ was allegedly 124. Not saying it's a bad score by any means, but it's fun to compare his results in life to those of IQ 200 robots.

IMO, these are the best traits for an intelligent person to have:
>objective, clear view of reality
>creativity
>ability to hold several ideas together at the same time
>willingness to learn
>ability to see the "big picture" in everything, not obsessing over small details like time tables and legos

[Anonymous No.9753153]

>>9752725
Now it seems like you just want attention.

Step 1: don't deliberately pick a wrong answer cuz you think you "outsmarted" the test.
Step 2: don't over think it

Basically, don't be an autistic retard and everything should be smooth sailing.

[Anonymous No.9753177]

>>9752725

> too creative and too out of the box to do IQ tests
> brags about his intelligence on 4chan instead of actually doing something with it

you're still useless like the rest of us

[Anonymous No.9753441]

>>9752725
Your answer is absolutely retarded.
Stop jerking off your own ego.
Work hard, achieve something, only then you will know youre smart.

[Anonymous No.9753487]

>>9751971
Intelligence isn't knowledge or action, you fucking retard. A highly intelligent person won't know something if they have no interest in it and thus haven't studied it.

Intelligence is essentially your brain's ability to form networks of associations (patterns), and to manipulate and reason with them in an adaptable and complex manner. This affects everything you do. Obviously it isn't the whole of your brain or possible results from it, no one ever said it was.

I think OP and some people ITT are caught up on very simple semantics, thinking intelligence = everything your mind is ever capable of producing or doing. Such a definition is laughable and not used in regards to IQ or any other measure, or even colloquially. Read some linguistics, philosophy, or something beyond your usual mode. You are in desperate need of it if you get bogged down in retarded shit like this. I'm almost tempted to dismiss this thread as bait.

[Anonymous No.9754195]

>>9752725
You are just dumb, I am sorry.
The idea is that you should follow a patter, see what is common between the examples and conclude the same thing for the next.

>I always, ALWAYS have a complex, sound logic behind my IQ test
What a dumb thing to say.
Obviously ANY pattern can be justified using complex enough logic.
1,2,3,4,5? What is the next number?
Obviously it is 213213213, because there is a polynomial which makes it fit exactly.

>99,9999% of you guys woul'd ve gone with the original answer on this one
Do you have autism, I am serious here, I look at the picture and KNOW what the person creating the test wants me to figure out.

[Anonymous No.9754370]

>>9752715
>People who score well are the same people who insist it's a good test. What a fucking surprise.
In the real world, everyone who isn´t a retard insists it´s a good test. The military, law enforcement, top-corporations and academia all place minimum IQ requirements for applicants to their more intellectually demanding departments.

[Anonymous No.9754378]

>>9752823
>Why is it that the people with the highest IQ's never really contribute anything to science and don't invent anything new?
>Because IQ isn't everything.
In that you are right. However, the percentage of "geniuses" (>130 IQ) that achieve something remarkable in their lives, be it in academia, business, or government, is vastly higher than that of the general population.

>. There was even a famous physicist whose IQ was allegedly 124.
Feynman didn´t take an IQ-test - his "score" was extrapolated from a fifth grade exam that did not meet nearly enough criteria to be considered an IQ-test.
> All the best scientists from the past 2 centuries have been in that range.
We have no understanding of what IQ anyone significant had prior to the 1940s, since they didn´t become commonplace until then. From 1900-1940, they were used to confirm the mental retardation of suspected dim-witted elementary school students.

[Anonymous No.9754528]

IQ is the only thing that matters. Anyone who has an IQ lower than 138 is inferior to me. Anyone who has a higher IQ is superior. Our entire worth is in our IQ. It doesn't matter what you accomplish in life, someone with a higher IQ score than yours is better than you and always will be. It's unfortunate but that's how it is. When the AI takes over and implements eugenics policies based on intelligence they would be well within their right to prioritise the life of a 145 IQ drug-addicted homeless criminal over mine (provided his drug addictions and poor living circumstances haven't reduced his IQ score).

[Anonymous No.9754533]

>>9751971
You are a retard off this line alone
>because I can almost feel the deepest fabric of our reality

[Anonymous No.9754687]

>>9752205
Based Chad

[Anonymous No.9754695]

>>9752205
whatever the shape behind the circle, there's no established pattern there that justifies whiting out part of its circumference

[Anonymous No.9754725]

>>9751971
In your pic the left is extrapolating information from the original picture while the right pic ignores information. Seems bretty accurate to me.

[Anonymous No.9754735]

>I have a 110 iq and got absolutely fucked in grad school
seems about right

[Anonymous No.9754741]

>>9754378
>Feynman didn´t take an IQ-test - his "score" was extrapolated from a fifth grade exam that did not meet nearly enough criteria to be considered an IQ-test.
Interesting. I can't really find a source available online for this, though. Do you have one?

[Anonymous No.9754775]

>>9754528
This supposes that everyone can live up to their potential. IQ is like your maximum ability. A homeless person is never gonna do anything with his high IQ. You would contribute more to society.

[Anonymous No.9754866]

>>9751994
Sounds to me like you have self esteem issues. If it's the most obvious answer then say it, don't drive yourself mad with self doubt. baka senpai sounds like brainlet behavior to me.

[Anonymous No.9754884]

>>9752715
>I'm going to revolutionize the modern physics

Well, what do you want to revolutionize in physics? I'll gladly listen to your ideas.

[Anonymous No.9754899]

this whole board is just a bag of cringe isn't it? Sad losers who have nothing else to do than larping/boasting their IQ's to other losers.

[Anonymous No.9755522]

I love it how researchers today take guesses at Newton's supposed IQ.
How the fuck can they have any idea how high it was or wasn't?

If someone tried to analyze me strictly on my actions in the outside world they wouldn't know shit about who or what I really am.
I'm the kind of guy who writes poems and builds his own generators and electric motors at home and watches football drunk when I go out.
Not even my friends believe me when I tell them I have a hidden intellectual side, they just laugh and hand me another beer. I mean I browse /sci/ for fuck's sake, I'm sure Neil "the grass" Tyson is here too.