- #1
- 367
- 0
Terminate This If You Can
- Thread starter tehno
- Start date
In summary: Which encompasses less than 1% of the world's population, I assume (I have the phrase "Less than 1% of the worlds population has an IQ over 135" in my head but I am not sure if that's correct. The picture looks valid in my head though!).I wonder of there's a timeline for the test. I might be able to get a few of them with enough time.There was never a time limit given (as far as i know) but I presume when it was used you'd get a reasonable amount of time 2-3h or something.The Haselbauer-Dickheiser test was designed to test intelligence in the range of 180 and greater.
- #2
- 672
- 4
tehno said:
Could you post a link to somewhere other than the physics forums? I know many of us can't actually see attachment files on the site for whatever reason...
DaveE
- #3
cristo
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
- 8,142
- 74
Yea, I can't see the attachment files either-- it's only seems to be in the brainteasers forum though... strange!
- #4
- 365
- 2
It's to preserve bandwidth issues I suspect. Otherwise, everyone would bog down the server if there were tons of attachments being viewed from physicsforums. I believe those who sponsor the forums have those priveleges.
- #5
DaveC426913
Gold Member
- 22,206
- 5,791
I always presumed it was more of a censorship/monitoring issue - ensuring nothing nasty was attached. Never followed through on the logic of that though.
- #6
cristo
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
- 8,142
- 74
complexPHILOSOPHY said:
It seems a bit strange that only one subforum has the attachments only viewable to PF contributors though.
DaveC426913 said:
All attachments must be approved, but before they have been approved , the attachment says "attachment pending approval" and doesn't provide a clickable link.
I think I'll ask about this in the feedback forum, since I thought I was just me that this happened to!
Last edited:
- #7
- 367
- 0
The attach is still on pending.Patience people.
- #8
Kurdt
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 4,851
- 6
Well I can see it. Its question 8 from the Haselbauer-Dickheiser test.
http://rooth.org/users/avfanatic/uber-IQ-test.pdf
http://rooth.org/users/avfanatic/uber-IQ-test.pdf
- #9
Kurdt
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 4,851
- 6
Anyway first guess at the answer, KBI?
- #10
DaveC426913
Gold Member
- 22,206
- 5,791
Kurdt said:
The encryption on p9? (Jeez, do these guys ever not know how to format a document!)
- #11
Kurdt
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 4,851
- 6
DaveC426913 said:
Yeah I was wondering whether people would get that question 8 or if i should post the page number.
- #12
- 367
- 0
Wrong.Kurdt said:
:zzz:Yeah,I've always had a feeling that this part of PF is the crapiest one.cristo said:
Last edited:
- #13
- 365
- 2
The questions and diagrams in the PDF from that link are ridiculous!
Are you guys good at answering this stuff? I don't even know where to start with half of these.
Are you guys good at answering this stuff? I don't even know where to start with half of these.
- #14
- 2,093
- 2
Guess: LJK
- #15
- 2,093
- 2
complexPHILOSOPHY said:
No wonder it's a test for exceptional intelligence. :tongue:
- #16
Kurdt
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 4,851
- 6
complexPHILOSOPHY said:
The Haselbauer-Dickheiser test was designed to test intelligence in the range of 180 and greater.
- #17
DaveC426913
Gold Member
- 22,206
- 5,791
I wonder of there's a timeline for the test. I might be able to get a few of them with enough time.
Last edited:
- #18
Kurdt
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 4,851
- 6
DaveC426913 said:
There was never a time limit given (as far as i know) but I presume when it was used you'd get a reasonable amount of time 2-3h or something.
- #19
- 365
- 2
Kurdt said:
Which encompasses less than 1% of the world's population, I assume (I have the phrase "Less than 1% of the worlds population has an IQ over 135" in my head but I am not sure if that's correct. The picture looks valid in my head though!).
How many get over 180?
- #20
turbo
Gold Member
- 3,250
- 56
The answer is JGD. The primary sort is on the number or intersections or crossings, and secondary sorting is reverse-alphabetic order.
- #21
DaveC426913
Gold Member
- 22,206
- 5,791
I rather enjoyed #21. Took me only 20 minutes. I did it formally (i.e using arithmetic algebra, no guessing or measuring).
I've seen #23 before but no matter how I tried, I never found a solution.
I've seen #23 before but no matter how I tried, I never found a solution.
Last edited:
- #22
DaveC426913
Gold Member
- 22,206
- 5,791
Are you referring to #9? The cryptogram?turbo-1 said:
P.S. I'm not sure we should really be publicly providing the answers here.
Last edited:
- #23
- 689
- 3
These were indeed very interesting problems. Thanks for posting them :)
- #24
- 826
- 6
Kurdt said:
Or those good at maths methinks, I think artists with no formal training in maths with an IQ of 180+ would be screwed by this test.:rofl: IQ tests are so arbitrary. Test creativity: now there's the problem, until you can an IQ test is as meaningless as any of the silly tests posted on this forum: are you a pervert, IQ asks one question, how have you been educated, and do you have inate ability, if we placed genius solely in the realms of IQ 180+ we'd have a very slim field. Feynman to name but one. I'd put him above anyone with an IQ of 180+, because intelligence unapplied is as pointless and arbitrary as a number called IQ. IQ tests are curiosities nothing more nothing less.
I looked at this test and thought why? It's obviously so biased it's unbelievable. How many of you could have done well without your maths training?
- #25
Kurdt
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 4,851
- 6
Schrodinger's Dog said:
Hey I never made the test I merely stated what it claimed it was designed for
- #26
- 826
- 6
Kurdt said:Hey I never made the test I merely stated what it claimed it was designed for
It's poor, let's face it.
If you made Leonardo De Vinci take it he'd score badly or a linguistics genius with no formal maths training or x. It is essentially designed to establish what you already know, that those who are brilliant at maths will do well at it, and few others.
I'm not criticisng the test per se or you, just what you can gleen from doing well at it, essentially your education and ability at maths and little else.
The comparison with the "are you a pervert" test is apposite IMO.
That said it's absolutely perfect for a physics forum.
Last edited:
- #27
Kurdt
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 4,851
- 6
Whatever it is its an interesting set of puzzles for your spare time.
- #28
- 826
- 6
Kurdt said:
Not for me I don't have the maths skills yet.
that makes me a dunce I guess, but as I said it's perfect for PF.- #29
DaveC426913
Gold Member
- 22,206
- 5,791
I am not so sure of this.Schrodinger's Dog said:
I haven't come across any actual math that is beyond the basic level. The key to these puzzles is to be resourceful at looking for patterns and dealing with abstractions. The fact that these are representable in mathematical terms does not mean this is all about math.
True, mathematicians use this skill a lot, and I grant that mathematicians will surely have a leg up in this test, but creative types and other clever people will be able to spot these patterns and abstractions too.
- #30
- 826
- 6
DaveC426913 said:
indeed it's not as if it's going to make it impossible for the untrained mathemetician to do well it just means it's not completely representative, in the same way as the IQ system tests for a westernised medium. Quite apart from it missing out some key pointers to achievement.
- #31
- 15
- 0
Are you supposed to be allowed pen and paper for #2? It looks just like simultaneous equations, but to attempt it without paper seems a little agonizing.