Here's another simple puzzle I had a good time solving.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

My math teacher played that game with us in class. 2 people out of 30 got it right. Unfortunatly I was not one of them. Figured it out later though.

Actually, I said I got 26 of the 33 in 3 minutes, and I said nothing in regards to whether or not I googled them.  What I did say, as you have quoted, was that the test could be completed in 10 minute with google or wikipedia.

 

Your assumption that I googled them, your assertion that it took me 10 minutes, when I stated it took 3.  Then you presume that I would want to dedicate more time to it, when I stated a few posts back that the test was boring.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Firstly, my mistake to claim it took you 10 minutes to complete 79% of the test, it was very late and I had finished both tests.

 

... some other specious reasoning ...

In order to continue something, it must be amusing.

This test was not amusing.

Therefore, I did not want to continue it.

 

Aside from the fact that I didn't say it was easy.  Ease of completion != compelling to complete.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Secondly, let's get this straight:

• It took you 3 Minutes to complete 79%,
  but
   
  
• you didn't complete it because "it wasn't fun"?
   
  
• So in the time it took to write one of your posts, "anyone" (according to your claim) would have finished the entire test.
   
  
• Is that your final excuse, or do you want some more time to think up another one?
  

Then, you tried to pretend that it was such a poor test, that it was beneath you.

This is where your line of reasoning fails, yet again. Where did I say it was "beneath me?" I said it wasn't fun, so I stopped. You know, kind of like why you would quit playing a game if it wasn't fun.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, you implied it.

imply

n verb (implies, implying, implied) indicate by suggestion rather than explicit reference. ⇒(of a fact or occurrence) suggest as a logical consequence.

DERIVATIVES

implied adjective

impliedly adverb

ORIGIN

Middle English (originally in the sense 'entangle'): from Old French emplier, from Latin implicare, from in- 'in' + plicare 'to fold'; cf. employ and implicate.

USAGE

On the difference between imply and infer, see usage at infer.

So you didn't spend two-and-a-half minutes to finish the test because you suddenly, after ten minutes and 79% of the way through the test, decided that it "wasn't fun", and reiterated that it was "easy to complete" (see yellow highlight, below).

 

So, if it was so easy to complete, why didn't you complete it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Lots of specious reasoning to cloud the issue

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I ask again, as you danced around it:

• if it would have taken you another 45 seconds to complete to test, why didn't you do so?
  
• Or were you saying that it would take you another seven minutes to obtain the last seven questions, if you used the wikipedia/google ?
  

In your hurry to denigrate the test and cast aspersions against those who took it, you weren't very clear.

 

But don't worry, you've convinced me!

This test is lame, I dont know no biblical stuffs! <_<

Why do you think Mothie-boy did so good?

It's a Conservative conspiracy to indoctrinate the populace with biblical miscellanea, allowing for a trigger phrase to launch them as mindless drones in their Christian Soldier Salvation Army!

No! We've been figured out!

 

Why do you think Mothie-boy did so good?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Because I'm so good at nursery rhymes.

Edited March 26, 200619 yr by Mothman

Much more fun (and challenging, I'd suspect) to break his hash encoding of the answers:

 

http://intelligence-test.net/part1/script2.js

That second test is hard! 16 so far.

Here's another simple puzzle I had a good time solving.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

My math teacher played that game with us in class. 2 people out of 30 got it right. Unfortunatly I was not one of them. Figured it out later though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Woo, I figured out the pattern on my second try. Which is much, much, MUCH better than I did at jags' test.

Crap. It took me 20 minutes to get it.

Retried the second part of the first intelligence test. It's a tough one. This is the highest I've gotten.

 

 

I could have sworn the answer to number 18 was "17 sides in a heptadecagonal polygon." Guess not.

Edited April 16, 200619 yr by Mothman

I got 17 of them

 

For the record: whatever that test measures, it sure as hell isn't intelligence. A real intelligence test does not require the user to apply knowledge to his answers, something which this test most certainly does.

That "Rose Petal" one is evil. Neutral evil, to be exact. I spent over half an hour coming up with all these mathematical forumulas before finally looking at it more "creatively".

Edited April 16, 200619 yr by Mothman

I got 15, hooray for average-ness.

I got 17 of them

 

For the record: whatever that test measures, it sure as hell isn't intelligence. A real intelligence test does not require the user to apply knowledge to his answers, something which this test most certainly does.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's more testing familiarity with platitudes and numerical significances: number of players in a team, for example, would be easy for someone who has played the sport, but not so straight forward if that sport were not played in their country.

 

Not intelligence, though, that's true.

A math challenge for all you geniuses (high school mathematics and a high IQ should be sufficient): Each of n gentlemen checks both a hat and an umbrella. The hats are returned at random and then the umbrellas are returned at random independently. What is the probability that no man gets back his hat and his umbrella?

 

+100 tombs pts for getting the correct answer. (you get no points if you majored in science during college.)

Edited April 19, 200619 yr by julianw

A math challenge for all you geniuses (high school mathematics and a high IQ should be sufficient): Each of n gentlemen checks both a hat and an umbrella. The hats are returned at random and then the umbrellas are returned at random independently. What is the probability that no man gets back his hat and his umbrella?

 

+100 tombs pts for getting the correct answer. (you get no points if you majored in science during college.)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

(1 - (1/(N^2)))^N ?

Oops, it was wrong. :">

 

Actually,

(!n / n!)^2, where !n =

I R brains.

Come on, Julian, give out the answer. :angry:

I got 19

A math challenge for all you geniuses (high school mathematics and a high IQ should be sufficient): Each of n gentlemen checks both a hat and an umbrella. The hats are returned at random and then the umbrellas are returned at random independently. What is the probability that no man gets back his hat and his umbrella?

 

+100 tombs pts for getting the correct answer. (you get no points if you majored in science during college.)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Probability of 1 gentleman getting his hat back: 1/n

Probability of 1 gentleman getting his brolly back: 1/n

Probability of two independent events happenning

P(hat ∩ brolly) = P(hat) P(brolly) = 1/n

Probability of 1 gentleman getting his hat back: 1/n

Probability of 1 gentleman getting his brolly back: 1/n

Probability of two independent events happenning

P(hat ∩ brolly) = P(hat) P(brolly) = 1/n

I got 23 in the first test and 13 in the second.

 

For the rose test, it took me almost 10 minutes to figure it out. I kept trying all sorts of formulas. I noticed the answers were all divisible by two and thought that I needed to figure out a pattern or formula that would lead to half of the answer. Then it hit me all of a sudden.

It's been a while since I've taken stats, so I was thinking you'd need to take into consideration the probability that your hat has been taken (essentially k/n). I suspect if I thought about it a bit more, I probably would have come to the derangement.

 

Is diamond correct though? Or has he found the probability that you get neither an umbrella or a hat? (the question asked for the probability you get both). Because if a person doesn't get their hat back, then they can safely get their umbrella back and still have a valid solution.