Prove to me that this isn’t a valid online IQ test. It was designed by Ilona Jerabek, a psychometrician who did her postdoctorate at McGill University.
https://testyourself.psychtests.com/staticid/975
>SUMMARY STATISTICS
https://testyourself.psychtests.com/tests/showpdf.php?name=classical_iq_lite/psychtests/classical_iq_lite.pdf
Number of Subjects: 15,884
Overall Cronbach’s Alpha: 0.91 (57 items)
Mean = 109.59
Standard Deviation = 18.67
>Standard IQ Tests Compared to Psychtest’s Classical IQ Test (0.70 indicates strong correlation)
Cattell – Pearson’s r(56) = .67, p < .001
Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale — Pearson’s r(109) = .70, p < .001
Raven’s Progressive Matrices — Pearson’s r(55) = .63, p < .001
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS – R) — Pearson’s r(68) = .72, p < .001
>>9039124
>Prove to me that this isn’t a valid online IQ test.
Burden of proof is on you.
>>9039130
>Taking rhetoric literally
The psychometrician has already proven it. The statistical summary is there to be read.
>>9039124
>trying to boil intelligence down to a single number
I seriously hope you guy don't do this.
Literally the only reason /sci/ has become obsessed with IQ is so that retards here can push the le smart but lazy meme. You can can completely fuck up at everything, drop out of school, and become a NEET, but you can still point to "b-but at least I have a big number for my IQ score."
Why isn't there any animals with wheels?
>>9038033
Why does this thread keep getting reposted?
A wheel is not that hard to make. You might have also heard stuff like "why didn't x civilization have wheels until x!?"
To that, I would just challenge you to build your own wagon. You'll quickly find that the wheel is not the problem, but the axel and joints. Same with nature. How can could you make a joint for a wheel? How could you turn it with purely biological means?
because legs are better
Would a technological singularity result in the creation of God?
>>9036614
yes
>>9036614
It depends on your definition of 'God' as anything created would still be bound by the laws of this universe
>>9036614
If God is a creation then it isn't a god.
Does true homosexuality actually exist in animals outside of humans? I know it's been observed in monkeys and dolphins before but this seems to be a result of a lack of intelligence more so than any true natural homosexual tendency. And to touch on that even more, does transgenderism exist in nature at all?
Most homosexuality cases in animals are observed in captivity. It's a mental disease. Period.
Is pic a trap?
>>9035784
Does it matter?
what separates humans from other animals?
Nothing
>>9032803
is it our ability to speak? is it our technological advancement? or is it perhaps our passion that draws the line between humans and other mammals?
ridiculous amount of social cohesion, learning power and consciousness
Okay /sci/, I've noticed a little quirk about this site that's a little annoying, and I think we would all agree would be a nice permanent change to the rules here on /sci/.
Obviously, /sci/ is for posts related to science/math, but it seems to be an unspoken rule that most of the time (emphasis on most), posts related to academia are excused.
However, there are instances where mods ban users rather inconsistently for posting non-/sci/ related material (but is still related to academia). I made a post a day or two ago about grad school applications and got banned, while pic related stayed up for a few days and, by the looks of it, probably maxed.
Can we please have a rule added to /sci/ allowing academia-related posts? It's already an unspoken rule, and the only thing not having this rule creates is inconsistent bans and quite a bit of frustration. I can't be the only anon that thinks this.
>inb4 go to /adv/
Really? C'mon
tl;dr All academia-related content should be allowed on /sci/.
Posting more "/sci/"-related content.
>>9032527
Academia threads should be banned. Take that circlejerking and shitposting to /b/
Holy shit.
quantum entanglement =/= FTL communication
>>9030066
>To perform the experiment, the Chinese team created entangled pairs of photons on the ground at a rate of about 4,000 per second. They then beamed one of these photons to the satellite, which passed overhead every day at midnight. They kept the other photon on the ground.
>Finally, they measured the photons on the ground and in orbit to confirm that entanglement was taking place, and that they were able to teleport photons in this way. Over 32 days, they sent millions of photons and found positive results in 911 cases. “We report the first quantum teleportation of independent single-photon qubits from a ground observatory to a low Earth orbit satellite—through an up-link channel— with a distance up to 1400 km,” says the Chinese team.
>So you're wrong, because they don't need to "check" both sets of entangled photons. They create photons with a specific spin, and then "trust" that the qubits are the same when they check them at the destination.
>Once they're sure entanglement is conserved, they "trust" the communicator not to foul the signal/entanglement en route.
>You just can't read.
>beamed one of the photons
>teleportation
Pick 1
>why should engineers even have to learn proofs? just give me the formulas i'll need to know
>>9024297
That's kinda true
>>9024297
>signs you're talking to a brainlet
When you are describing something or teaching someone about something and their eyes sort of glaze over like they've been hypnotized.
>back to /pol/
is there any sort of study behind mental exhaustion? i've been studying for a 3 hour long test by doing problem sets. the questions themselves are trivial, but after i finish even a single section i just want to turn my brain off.
>>9041521
Maybe you should focus on something else
Like seriously, if you study for an hour or two stop it and play video games or watch a show or shitpost for a few minutes. Once you get back, you'll feel refreshed as fuck. Just make sure you get back, otherwise it'll just plain old never get done. Which reminds me
>>9041564
>playing video games
>>9041570
I know right, what a fucking neckbeard loser, lol he should just get laid sometime
Any engineers have any coming out stories they wouldn't mind sharing?
I am thinking about telling my family tonight at dinner.
They are pretty liberal so I don't think they will mind.
I just don't want to disappoint my father.
>>9041501
kek
>>9041501
Very funny, anon.
very nice goat
1+2+3+4... = -1/12
Can someone explain this shit to a brainlet?
>>9041308
Considering the Riemann Zeta function on the complex plane to be analytically continuous gives us that the output for the input of -1, which results in the addition of all natural whole integers, is analytically continuated to be -1/12
It's simple math anon. Consider being a philosopher or other brainlet subjects
>>9041323
But the rienmann zeta function is another story, still doesn't make 1+2+3+4... equal -1/12. How the fuck does that not add up to infinite?
If you can't intuitively see why it would be -1/12, then you probably shouldn't be studying mathematics. It's basic convergence. 1 + 2 is a very small part of the way to -1/12. 1 + 2 + 3 is a slightly larger part of the way, etc.
Can someone please redpill me on why analysis and combinatorics (and the side of number theory sharing their flavor) are for brainlets while algebraic topology, algebraic geometry, and the proper side of algebraic number theory are for those of superior intellect?
I have always thought that subjects like PDE theory and combinatorics require novel proof techniques to derive their solutions and therefore reward creativity and problem-solving skills in a way that topos theory and other autistic endeavors do not. Algebraic subjects seem to reward breadth of knowledge over sheer IQ. Besides, any good analyst with good grasp of SCV could easily transfer his knowledge to big-boy alg geo.
Why am I wrong?
How fucking stupid are you, OP?
Pure maths is all about garnering prestige by working on problems outside the public's comprehension. No one is going to be impressed if they understand the statements of the problems you work on unless the problem is very famous.
Nearly all pure maths students want to the problems that are the most abstract and seemingly esoteric -- and hence the most impressive. But only the best can work on the algebraic topics and still be employable.
The most productive analysts -- Tao, for example -- work on analysis even though they could be algebraists if they tried because they know that they'll get more attention if they gather up the low-hanging fruit that the dummy analysts who couldn't make it in algebra couldn't reach.
>>9041212
>The most productive analysts -- Tao, for example -- work on analysis even though they could be algebraists if they tried
Tao has actually stated that he struggled with algebra and topology
>>9041152
That perception probably exists because the big post-modern wizardy mathematicians of the 20th century were in algebra. Serre, Grothendieck, et al.
No one actually believes this meme.
Hey sci, does anyone know the top systems biology PhD programs in the USA? Looking to go to grad school soon.
UNC
Stanford
U Chicago
Berkely
MIT
Maybe Duke or John's Hopkins
Anything else is meme tier.
What about Stanford's program is great? Not saying it isn't, but I did not like the sound of its curriculum and program as much Berkely and the other UC system schools.
>>9041176
When you graduate, your diploma will say "Stanford" on it and people will be like "wow! This guy is smart!!!"
What is the least brainlet trade in the military?
From my experience, there's going to be brainlets wherever you go and at any rank.
I don't know how it works in America, but the best you can do is try and get in as an officer in a position that requires an engineering degree of some sort.
Trauma surgeon
Only brainlets with no marketable skills go military, so they can live as welfare queens on government money yet still pretend to be fiscal conservatives
Why do we give Biologists the mic with regards to anthropology. Most contemporary Anthropologists would agree race is real.
>>9040544
As far as I know, they don't. In general its too fragmented to say that race is real or not. "black people" from one part of africa are very genetically different than black people 500 miles away.
And Anthropologists would say that ethnic groups are real but race is also fragmented.
this is how human "races" really look like
they dont look like neat distinct categories
on the other hand, it is not true that there are no differences either
>>9040560
Look's pretty distinct desu. Look at the groups not intersecting.