All IQ testing websites I've used I've told me I'm

the answer to the OP is 1089 in case anyone is wondering

>>37320460
Why do you care so much about IQ, OP? You know those tests were originally created to identify the retarded and not the other end of the spectrum. Are you afraid you're retarded?

>>37320481
It's 36 you dip shit.

(1+1) x (1+1) = 4
(2+2) x (2+2) = 16
(3+3) x (3+3) = 36

>11 x 11 = 4
False.

>>37320460
You probably won't find anything legit on the internet, I once took one of those and purposely chose all the wrong answers and still got a 114.
>>37320528
>Are you afraid you're retarded?
OP isn't overestimating his IQ or anything, he said it's barely above 100..

>>37320528
Curiously mostly. It's not going to change anything, but it's interesting to see if it had any part in my success (I'm very low IQ, but earn a high salary).

>>37320541
>implying they follow a nonstandard pattern and it's not just to throw you off

File: 1495948374023.png (489KB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

489KB, 499x499px

>>37320528
>>37320569

By the way, while 100 might seem almost derogatory on the internet (because everyone adds 20 points), it's actually the definition of average.

It's like making fun of someone for being 5 ft 10 inches or something (which, coincidentally, you guys do).

>>37320554
> doesn't understand that the only thing needed for math is a consistent set of rules.
Notation can vary.

>>37320647
I am going to kick your ass.

>>37320601
Well I have no Idea how the other anon got 1089.

>>37320554
The "x" symbol is simply an operator it doesn't always imply multiplication.

Get this retarded nigger math off this board.

>>37320541
You could also look at it this way:
Let 11 represent a number..such number times itself equals 4 so 11 equals 2.
22 is 2 times 11 aka 2*2=4; check 4*4=16, ok.
33 is 3 times 11 aka 3*2=6; 6x6=36.
Your way is easier to think about it -- i don't know why my instinct was to look at it the way I did though. Maybe I'm just an idiot.

>>37320686
33x30=990
33x3=99
99+990=1089

It's another meme math image where non-standard or sloppy notation and undefined variables lead there to being either no acceptable solution or multiple conflicting solutions based on interpretation.

The correct answer, as always, is to invite everyone involve to kill themselves and move to another thread.

>>37320768
11x10=110
11x1=11
11+110=121
what?

>>37320460

online IQ tests are all bullshit, they have to be timed (since any idiot can solve an IQ test if they're given as long as they want) and monitored (so you can't just reference a guide book like you can sitting alone in your room)

if you want a real IQ test done look up when your local mensa is doing theirs, they're usually free

>>37320789
its not about remembering notation rules its just basic pattern recognition. Are you too autistic to even consider tinking outside of PEMDAS

>>37320846
i promise you im not going to cheat. i just need a rough estimate.

>>37320541
>>37320750
11x11=[(1+1)+(1+1)]*1=4
22x22=[(2+2)+(2+2)]*2=16
33x33=[(3+3)+(3+3)]*3=36
:)

>>37320789
Pretty sure the answer is 36, dude.

>>37320866
estimate of what?

>>37320722
xy = x*y. Why? convention because some enlightenment faggots decided it looked nice to write stuff that way. From the pick it is clear that digits next to each other are equivalent to the digits with a plus sign in between in conventional notation. What is presented is a portion of a consistent system of operations. Enough examples are given to extrapolate a few rules. 11=1+1. Simple pattern recognition is in every real IQ test.

It's 18 you dipshits. The sum of the products of the first one gives you 4 (1+2+1) and the second one gives you 16 (4+8+4)

>>37320481
>>37320541

Two examples is not enough to establish a pattern.

It could be 64 if the third number is simply 4^3 because 4^2 is 16 and 4^1 is 4. It could be 256 if the answer is the square of the last solution. It could have something else to do with the properties of the numbers 11, 22, and 33. You can't tell if you only have the two answers.

>>37321047
>The sum of the products of the first one gives you 4 (1+2+1) and the second one gives you 16 (4+8+4)
Could you break this down? I'm an idiot.
11x11 ... so you're saying "x" represents a function that means to take the sum of the products, which in the first case is (1*1)+(1*1)=2?

File: 1495948149774.jpg (58KB, 518x590px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 518x590px

The answer is 26 you fucking idiots.

>>37321089
>It could be 64 if the third number is simply 4^3 because 4^2 is 16 and 4^1 is 4
How does 4^x relate back to the first half? I don't see a way to explain that in a way that gets you 64. If you're just looking at the right half, sure, 64, 256, whatever, those are all good.

>>37321147
Where did you get (3+2) for the first one and (1+1) for the second?

>>37320866
was a reply to >>37320808

sorry buddy

33 times 33 is 1,089. first two answers are wrong. lol, it's simple arithmetic

>>37321260
Capital X is not the multiplication symbol, lowercase x is ;)