>>143546678", 6'2, 141 IQ, 20 VM on benchmark. But I didn't feel like bringing it up. You cheating on the test was precisely my point. Hell, you can even commit fraud with your WAIS papers. It really just depends on the extent of your vanity.
> made by individuals over 160 IQ,ROLF sure buddy, you tell yourself that, I remember that schizo paul cooljimans convincing himself that the fact there is a negative correlation between his test and matrix reasoning meant low validity of matrix reasoning, not his test. Precisely the sort of guy to claim over 160 IQ.
> We do not usually see brilliant physicists at 120, we see them 150 and above almost always. Have you secured any proctored score that wasn't done in childhood? Didn't think so.
>>14354811Not sure if troll since am Aspie. But I think you might be confusing integration and value results for functions. The rarity is integration of an interval from a particular IQ to plus or minus infinity, depending on what you're trying to express. Then you divide that integral by the integral of the whole function. But the erfc() function does that for you.
>>14355177Congrats, not to sound sour, but you're officially smarter than the strong majority in here. You can pursue whatever you want, within reason. But just be cognizant of the fact it'll be a steep hill up. I wouldn't go for an entrepreuner or tenured professor if I were you, since even though you still could, you'd have no other aspect in life just to get somewhere.
>>14355827Potato, potatoh. 145 is ~99.865th percentile. Technically, the closest to 99.9th percentile is 148, but considering the fact most ceilings are at 145, ceiling effect would predict 148. ("50th percentile of the cut-off sample") You guys are really, really bad at maths, especially for a board that specializes in maths. lol
>>14355817I am suspicious of those grandiose delusions, but I appreciate your humility.
>>14355401Intelligence is biological, low age and health help tho.
