Kevin's Watch

Here's a version of a standard IQ test you can take online... obviously it's an approximation (especially since you could technically look for answers on google) but it can be interesting to see what kind of questions are asked and whether you can solve the logic puzzles they offer.

www.iqtest.org.uk/

I scored a 133. Some of the shape pattern ones were very difficult, and one of the number patterns was as well.

Damn. I shouldn't have rushed it, because I just realised what the pattern was to two of the maths ones.

I got a 148.

Good enough to get into Mensa. Not good enough to be happy with the results (no freakin' verbal questions? WTF?).

Yeah, I noiced that, though I must say the lack of verbal questions definitely helped my score. I usually test in the high 130's.

i'm not even tellin. i'm really bad with numbers. and like...what were all those boxes and circles with lines through them? what does that mean?

*snort*
...I won't even bother...

I punched my screen on question #1.

I hate "ciphering".
I'm like Jethro from the Beverly Hillbillies: "naught from naught is naught. Naught from one is one...."

High Lord Tolkien wrote:I punched my screen on question #1.

I hate "ciphering".
I'm like Jethro from the Beverly Hillbillies: "naught from naught is naught. Naught from one is one...."

oh!! guzintas!!! i know guzintas!!! 1 guzinta 1 1 time right?

qntm.org/?1111

If we let the function f be

f(n) = (41/24)(n-1)(n-2)(n-3)(n-4) + 1

then we have

f(1) = 1
f(2) = 1
f(3) = 1
f(4) = 1
f(5) = 42

Therefore the next number might as well be 42. The same trick can be pulled off with any given integer sequence. In fact, it can be any number you like. This is not particularly hard to prove.

This is a very pedantic point to make, but you have to be a pedant to be a mathematician, because making unjustified assumptions while answering questions can be catastrophic. However, often the answer in questions like these is either fairly obvious or easy to find, so while this technique is an entertaining party trick (if one is at a particularly dull party), it's usually quicker to just find the next integer by traditional methods.

Or if you reaaaallly want to cheat:

www.research.att.com/~njas/sequences/

why would i want to cheat. that would defeat the purpose wouldn't it?

i mean...who cares, right? i don't care. i know a fella who has an IQ that's embarassingly high, and yet, at 40, he decided it was a good idea to do heroin. smart, eh? whatever. by 45 he was nearly dead twice before he realized perhaps it wasn't such a great idea to be a junkie.

i don't KNOW which box with a line through it ought to be next in the sequence and i got no earthly on number sequences either but, heh,
i know better than to get a smack jones at 40. i figure i'm okey dokey.

I think you're getting intelligence and wisdom mixed up. IQ only measures potential; wisdom is what keeps you off stuff like heroin.


And yes, every one of those damned boxes made perfect sence to me. What can I say? I'm a closet Hile Troy!

115. i would have did better in verbal stuff.

Yeah, some people just have a gift for things like that. Like my buddy Matt who could recite any string of numbers. Mathematically, mechanically, and spatially I do alright, but it's only the verbal stuff that I can blow out.

And Luci, don't get me started on that whole "street smarts" vs. "book smarts" crap. 99% of people can learn the first if they have to. You can't say that the other way around.

i don't get what you mean. you mean 99% of people can learn street smarts but only 1% of people can learn which box goes where the question mark is?

(see this is why i didn't do well. i always have questions )

I'm not infamous, so the IQ test wouldn't apply.

Lucimay wrote:i don't get what you mean. you mean 99% of people can learn street smarts but only 1% of people can learn which box goes where the question mark is?

(see this is why i didn't do well. i always have questions )

He means the majority of people can learn street smarts, but the majority cannot learn book smarts. It's not only due to the fact that the the value of street smarts are much more visceral, while the value of book smarts is more esoteric. It's also due to the perception that street smarts will get you further in life than mere book smarts.

thanks dAN.

Heh, I phrased that interestingly. I said 'street smarts are' vs. 'book smarts is', implying that I think the value of street smarts outweighs the value of book smarts...

Another side note: I tested lower when I was married than at any other point in my life, before or after said marriage. That proves marriage really does make an idiot out of you!