The world's shortest IQ test will reveal how average your intelligence is in 3 questions

[rightwinger]

I didn't use any math. No equations. Nothing. Math is not necessary.

Still math

 

[Bleipriester]

- When you wasted 2000 tanks within one year in a war against Russia and you get 62 new ones, how long will it take to waste them too?

- When you have 5000 tents, each for three persons, how many immigrants can you shovel into California, when you lose 15 % from starving, 12,5 % from criminal actions and 6 % from drug abuse?

- When you are a flat earther and donate half your wage to your guru each month, how long is the equator?

 

[Circe]

3. In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, how long would it take for the patch to cover half of the lake?

47. I love that one --- I think they used to do it using chess boards and beans, long ago.

 

[Circe]

- When you have 5000 tents, each for three persons, how many immigrants can you shovel into California, when you lose 15 % from starving, 12,5 % from criminal actions and 6 % from drug abuse?

I am really tempted to work this one out -----

 

[miketx]

IQ tests offer a formula that allows you to compare yourself to other people and see how average (or above average) your intelligence is.
The Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) is dubbed the world’s shortest IQ test because it consists of just three questions. It assesses your ability to identify that a simple problem can actually be harder than it first appears. The quicker you do this, the more intelligent you appear to be.

Here are the three questions:​

1. A bat and a ball cost £1.10 in total. The bat costs £1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?

2. If it takes five machines five minutes to make five widgets, how long would it take 100 machines to make 100 widgets?

3. In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, how long would it take for the patch to cover half of the lake?

47

 

[1srelluc]

Yeah, I forgot everyone here is a genius--with internet access~

Unlike you we retain what we learn.

 

[Votto]

1) Giant robot
2) Pineapple
3) Titties

1. Dunno
2. Don't care
3. Orange man is bad
4. Besides, January 6th.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

Here is what a lot of people guess:​

1. 10 pence

2. 100 minutes

3. 24 days

These answers would be wrong.

When you're ready, scroll down for the correct answers, and how you get to them:

1. The ball would actually cost 0.05 pence

If the ball costs X, and the bat costs £1 more, then it will be:

X+£1

Therefore

Bat+ball=X + (X+1) =1.1

Thus

2X+1=1.1, and 2X=0.1

X= 0.05

2. It would take 5 minutes to make 100 widgets.

Five machines can make five widgets in five minutes; therefore one machine will make one widget in five minutes too.

Therefore if we have 100 machines all making widgets, they can make 100 widgets in five minutes.

3. It would take 47 days for the patch to cover half of the lake

If the patch doubles in size each day going forward, it would halve in size going backwards. So on day 47, the lake is half full.

In a survey of almost 3,500 people, 33 per cent got all three wrong, and 83 per cent missed at least one.

While this IQ test has its shortcomings – its brevity, and lack of variation in verbal and non-verbal reasoning - only 48 per cent of MIT students sampled were able to answer all three correctly.

Did anyone get a perfect score?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[JOSweetHeart]

2. If it takes five machines five minutes to make five widgets, how long would it take 100 machines to make 100 widgets?

I may need a little more information about this question if it can be given. My question is during those five minutes, is only one widget coming from each of the five machines or is each of them making five widgets during the five-minute time frame?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[Missourian]

10 pence

Tell me you're not in the US without telling me you're not in the US.

 

[SmokeALib]

Did you vote for pedo joe?
If you did, you're a fuckin idiot.
No iq test required.

 

[Circe]

- When you are a flat earther and donate half your wage to your guru each month, how long is the equator?

My answer is Yes. Did I win?

 

[rightwinger]

Did you vote for pedo joe?
If you did, you're a fuckin idiot.
No iq test required.

Jan 6 proved us right

 

[iamwhatiseem]

This would be a test for measuring your ability to do math in your head, not IQ.

 

[SmokeALib]

Jan 6 proved us right

Paleeeze...
You BLM cultists have destroyed more property and murdered more civilians than the capitol protestors ever thought about doing.
Is Trump a damn fool for not putting a stop to it sooner than he did? Yep.
Still doesn't excuse anyone voting for the bumbling fool pedo joe.

 

[Resnic]

IQ tests offer a formula that allows you to compare yourself to other people and see how average (or above average) your intelligence is.
The Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) is dubbed the world’s shortest IQ test because it consists of just three questions. It assesses your ability to identify that a simple problem can actually be harder than it first appears. The quicker you do this, the more intelligent you appear to be.

Here are the three questions:​

1. A bat and a ball cost £1.10 in total. The bat costs £1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?

2. If it takes five machines five minutes to make five widgets, how long would it take 100 machines to make 100 widgets?

3. In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, how long would it take for the patch to cover half of the lake?

IQ tests are fake.

That's why there are 10s of 1000s of IQ tests. There is no standard for them because they are based on absolutely nothing at all. There is no discernable fact, no standards, no science behind it.

Even if you gave every person on the planet the exact same IQ test it still doesn't denote intelligence. Some people are natural good test takers and others are not. They can have the same level of intelligence and one aces it, the other fails despite knowing the material because they aren't good at test taking.

Intelligence comes in a vast vast vast amount of ways. You can be a math wizard but that doesn't mean you can even function at much else, critical thinking skills, being able to be rational under pressure, thinking inside the box or outside the box, having philosophical intelligence and so on. No one is a master at everything.

IQ tests are like lie detectors. There is a reason why they aren't used in a court of law. It's pseudo science that is a joke and neither one is ever used in a official capacity anywhere.

No one anywhere asks for a iq test when interviewing for a job. An IQ test isn't used to get into a college. If an IQ test was real they would be used as qualifications everywhere, but they are used nowhere.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

IQ tests are fake.

That's why there are 10s of 1000s of IQ tests. There is no standard for them because they are based on absolutely nothing at all. There is no discernable fact, no standards, no science behind it.

Even if you gave every person on the planet the exact same IQ test it still doesn't denote intelligence. Some people are natural good test takers and others are not. They can have the same level of intelligence and one aces it, the other fails despite knowing the material because they aren't good at test taking.

Intelligence comes in a vast vast vast amount of ways. You can be a math wizard but that doesn't mean you can even function at much else, critical thinking skills, being able to be rational under pressure, thinking inside the box or outside the box, having philosophical intelligence and so on. No one is a master at everything.

IQ tests are like lie detectors. There is a reason why they aren't used in a court of law. It's pseudo science that is a joke and neither one is ever used in a official capacity anywhere.

No one anywhere asks for a iq test when interviewing for a job. An IQ test isn't used to get into a college. If an IQ test was real they would be used as qualifications everywhere, but they are used nowhere.

So you don't do well on them eh?

 

[Circe]

IQ tests are fake.

That's why there are 10s of 1000s of IQ tests. There is no standard for them because they are based on absolutely nothing at all. There is no discernable fact, no standards, no science behind it.

Even if you gave every person on the planet the exact same IQ test it still doesn't denote intelligence. Some people are natural good test takers and others are not. They can have the same level of intelligence and one aces it, the other fails despite knowing the material because they aren't good at test taking.

Intelligence comes in a vast vast vast amount of ways. You can be a math wizard but that doesn't mean you can even function at much else, critical thinking skills, being able to be rational under pressure, thinking inside the box or outside the box, having philosophical intelligence and so on. No one is a master at everything.

IQ tests are like lie detectors. There is a reason why they aren't used in a court of law. It's pseudo science that is a joke and neither one is ever used in a official capacity anywhere.

No one anywhere asks for a iq test when interviewing for a job. An IQ test isn't used to get into a college. If an IQ test was real they would be used as qualifications everywhere, but they are used nowhere.

Ummmmmmmmmmm ----- I think this is like pornography, we can't define it but we know it when we see it.

You are plainly highly intelligent: see the post above. Some posters here who shall be nameless, not so much.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

IQ tests offer a formula that allows you to compare yourself to other people and see how average (or above average) your intelligence is.
The Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) is dubbed the world’s shortest IQ test because it consists of just three questions. It assesses your ability to identify that a simple problem can actually be harder than it first appears. The quicker you do this, the more intelligent you appear to be.

Here are the three questions:​

1. A bat and a ball cost £1.10 in total. The bat costs £1.00 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?
2. If it takes five machines five minutes to make five widgets, how long would it take 100 machines to make 100 widgets?
3. In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, how long would it take for the patch to cover half of the lake?

Only one of those required any thought at all for me, and that was the first one, and it didn't take very much thought. The bat costs £1.05, and the ball costs £0.05.

The other two were so obvious that any thought on my part was wasted thought, trying to determine whether there was some hidden complication that I wasn't noticing, to make them harder than they appeared. There doesn't seem to be any such complications.

The machines in the second question each turn out widgets at a rate of one per five minutes. N machines will turn out N widgets n five minutes. However many machines you have, you'll get that many widgets in every five minutes. One machine will turn out one widgets in five minutes. Five machines will turn out five widgets in five minutes. A hundred machines will turn out a hundred widgets in five minutes. A million machines will turn out a million widgets in five minutes. It took much more thought to explain this than it did to understand the question itself and to know what the correct answer is.

Being an old computer geek, I well understand the behavior of exponential growth, especially of powers of two. But it doesn't even take that to understand the third question. When the patch completely covers the lake, then that is twice the size of a patch that half-covers the lake. The patch doubles in size each day, so if it took 48 days to completely cover the lake, then the lake was half covered a day earlier, at 47 days. At 47 days it half-covered the lake, so that one more day, one more doubling, wholly covered the lake.


I have to question the value of this test. I know that I am well above average, but not all that exceptional, and yet I seem to be very near the top of the range of this test. There are plenty of people in the world more intelligent than I, but very little room for them to do any better on this test than I.