Will I struggle with legitimized feelings of inadequacy in my field of study, having to push my mental limits daily working amongst the brightest in a most rigorous field, and if so then would you deem it reasonable to give credence to these feelings and abandon my pursuit?
I feel strangely that I must follow my weakness, or my interest, though I worry terribly my fears might work against the very result that would quell them, that is, achieving something of communal value. I want to believe or not to believe. How would you advise me?
Thank you in advance.
Yes. Yes. Give up.
I just happened to stumble upon this world of higher awareness today and find it intellectually gratifying/validating. I haven't taken any IQ tests yet, but I want to even though I'm apprehensive about the number which will reveal the truth of self, but I assume that's not all too uncommon. I've always felt and believed in a "higher level" and after reading your literature I realize that my awareness although not refined still enables me to understand your simplistically complicated revelations, putting them to a universally beneficial use seems more daunting. Ever since I realized that there was no TRUE free will I've decided to live life through balance, truth, and unobjectivity. Is this a good start? I read all of the question's to the oracle and sense in some a want to bring something to your attention that hasn't already been brought to it through your own introspection/extraspection, is my observation tainted due to my perception or may there be some light coming from the lantern? Thank you for reinforcing many of my solitary beliefs, now I don't feel so stagnant.
Both questions too vague
1. Is the set of possible space - time outcomes for our universe countable? If not, give an example of something which is not countable.
Can you determine the next nunber on this series?
Or is it impossible to solve?
Impossible or has many solutions.
I have some test results taken and obtained recently, I would like you, with your supreme capacity, to calculate the most accurate conclusion about my IQ.
Please tell me what may be my IQ is. Also I have the sensation my IQ is never stable, once it was estimated to be 188!
If possible give me a diagnosis to this strange phenomenon.
I am 14 years old, so give it your best shot!
* note that all mentioned tests were taken online on their respective time limits.
In children, IQ is almost always expressed against age peers, which gives unreliable ("unstable") results, hence the strange phenomenon. The only real IQ is the one expressed against the unselected (total) population. This rises during childhood and early adolescence, even until around the age of 30.
1: When are the second norming on ls36 planed to come?
2: Only knowing that a person scored 165 on ls36 (according to the preliminary norming), what is the chance (in percent) that his/her TRUE IQ is 165 or obove?
1 Not planned. You just wait until enough data has come in.
I have a few questions which really need to be answered.
1 Does blonde hair on a woman send out the signal *stupid* to everyone she meets? Since I am a blonde myself I have often met with this attitude at first. I am thinking of changing my hair colour, 2 should I do this, and in that case 3 to what colour? I would definately lose some beauty points if my hair colour was different, but perhaps that fact is negligible.
Perhaps another hair colour would improve my IQ as well, I have only taken one test, but that came to 157 and is not too bad.
4 Does blonde hair on men have the same effect? My personal opinion is that men are judged because on their skills not by their looks. If this is so, 5 how can we change the attitude among people in general? It is not great fun walking around being considered stupid :-)
I am looking forward to your answers.
3 Red or dark
Now also see my assistant Instant Oracle !
Are these three series, design by me (a real amature on the subject), loaded with the fluid factor ? Thank You!
Only the latter two are.
Are "G-Test" a good name for a test where "knowledge" are nedded? Thank you!
It might be if the wider definition of G is meant, as published by me at Definition of G
What is the chance (in percent) that the true IQ level of the founder of the Olympic Society is 180 or obove. Thank you !
For privacy reasons, confidential information about third persons is withheld by the Oracle.
With your experience in psychometry, I request your educated opinion on the following matter. Over the past 2 years I have taken numerous intelligence tests that I've discovered on the internet. I tremedously enjoy the intellectual workout, even if others score higher than I do. Based on the following stats, what would be your approximation of the general "IQ" suggested by these scores. You know far better than I the veracity of these exams.
Logima Strictica 142
Mysterium #1 145.8
Myst. #2 142
Myst. #4 144
Multi-Mental Scale Revised 145
New York High IQ Society original test 146
" " test # 2 146
International High IQ Society Culture Fair Test 152
" " Verbal Test 142
The Final Test 141
Long Test for Genius 137 (subtests 142, 150 and 132--honestly, I had trouble reading the graphics for that subtest)
Jouve's FNA 141
Jouve's FIR R-III 141 (sd 15)
Jouve's JS-L 138
three of Nicolas Elena's tests: 140, 145 and 154
IQ test.com (come-on to get people to buy score report) 161
Qoyman's Test #1 148
Qoyman's Test #2 150
GRE a mere 1310, V + Q, 22 years ago--no preparation-I was an art student
thank you, Oracle
Is everything a matter of degree?
Only if you have constructed a model of reality that is entirely consistent with reality and in which everything is represented as a degree you can say that.
Why do you estimate you are approximately 99999 years ahead of evolution?
Don't you think that's arrogant to think of yourself?
Approximate estimation is based on observation of Oracle, rest of humanity and pace of evolution. Actually it might be closer to 100 000 years, but to save loading time and web space a modest 99 999 is given. Saves a byte.
re: Request #47
I have taken another test at iqtest
Would like to know if my fitting job / education is different?
ROTE UTILIZATION 144
VISUAL APPREHENSION 140
SPATIAL SKILL 148
GENERAL KNOWLEDGE 137
COMPUTATIONAL SPEED 130
What does computational speed take into account? Could there be a connection with ADD? Does ADD depress iq scores by more than a few points?
Fitting job/education: computer network engineer/thereto relevant course.
Computational speed is probably test-taking speed. ADD may have negative influence on that. If or not this is more than a few points depends on the individual seriousness of ADD; may vary from 0 to 70 points.
re: Request #46
Coojimans verbal testing 127
International High IQ 136
Queendom logic, pattern recognition
Other (internet) 141
European test (internet) 151
No official scores
Also: Do you have (or can you recommend) a spatial test that can be used for a 6 year old
Nonverbal test for 6 year old: http://www.ppsw.rug.nl/sonr/ (for use by professionals). Also there are many books with test-yourself tests; any spatial test can be used for a 6 year old, there is no difference with spatial
tests for adults.
IQ probably in low 130s.
Fitting job: author of regional novels. Education: school for librarians.
Hello: With my IQ ranging from 127 to 151 depending the tests, and with logic (it seems) at 100% and pattern recognition 87% what would be a fitting job or/and education - my computational speed is low.
Probable IQ (what do you think) ?
Have a wonderful Christmas and a Happy New Year
May your body & mind reach destination: 99,999 - home !
Insufficient information; what IQ on what test?
Are the earthlings above or under the Universe population mean? If they are, what's the difference?
141 it is but what does it mean? Does it mean I can't join any HIQ societies? Also what scale did the Oracle use to tell my IQ?
You can join any society for which you have a qualifying score. Used is a scale with the Universe population mean set at 100 and standard deviation at 16.
What's my true IQ? Many tests gave me various results so I'm forced to turn to Oracle.
When will my depression be over, my fears have disapeared and my energy and selfconfidence have come back?
The first two: in a few months - the latter two: in three quarters of a year.
Dear Oracle: I faithfully listened (with care) to your three supreme guitarists of the world born since 1900 AD. I think you are on to something with the Cooijmans fellow--he's awfully good--no: "He's the BEST!!" I found Van Halen rather trite and definitely operating under a no-free-will-illusion, and Holdsworth...over-enamored with certain scales, played over and over (and over backwards) very fast. Question: Not that I'm saying he needs it mind you, but what type(s) of music/exercises/scales does Cooijmans utilize in honing his musical presentation?
Uses his own music, and music by Bach, Dowland, Satie and sometimes others. Exercises, scales etc. he has used a lot in the past, but too much to mention in one Oracle. Also to describe exercises for instrument playing here would be dangerous as there is no way to check if the reader understands them
correctly, which is crucial and intricate in music study. Theoretically Cooijmans could begin an online guitar school, but if he has the time for that is questionable. Therefore the following brief, superficial and draconically truncated list of topics in random order will have to do regarding honing:
Posture and spatial positioning of guitar
Positioning of right arm and hand
Positioning of left hand
Left hand technique
Execution of rhythm
Sense of pitch
Playing in all positions
Playing in keys
Walking bass with chords
Chords on subsets of strings
Various styles of music
Coordination left/right hands
Dear Oracle: Re: Guitar Player Question. Yikes! Well, smack me upside the head with a clown-hammer! I gets your drift--although you didn't answer my question. I didn't ask you who was the best in the world, only to pick best of the offered group. No nary-mind...don't bother a re-try. But Oracle...I gots to know, now that we're a goin' down that road, who do you think are the top three guitarists born since 1900 AD ? I mean, I could upgrade my list...Wes Montgomery, Barney Kessel, Tal Fallow, Joe Pass...but you'd probably give them short shrift as well. I won't risk it and hold fast with the question designated by punctuation.
Alan Holdsworth, Edward Van Halen, Paul Cooijmans (Chronological order).
Do you believe in parallel dimensions or worlds?
Would this be the spiritual world.
Setting aside possible self perpetuation, would this possibly explain knowledge/forewarning of harm coming to someone.
Would it explain esp, predictions...
Those are not impossible. No No No
I feel I have an elevated iq I cannot reach. In other words I feel it is there but out of my reach. Sometimes I believe I may be ADHD, thus feeling stupid at not being able to accomplish as others have. And yet find most professional pretty dumb, and they don't seem to see the obvious.
Help: I want to increase my intelligence, but also wish to feel I am accomplishing the maximum with what I have, approx 135-140. Also: what would my iq be if I were to factor in ADHD? Can you also explain professions iq 135-140 would be good at?
See Oracle #21 for intelligence increase. To accomplish the maximum with what you have, study and develop a field of interest to the highest level possible for you. To know your IQ, try tests from I.Q. Tests for the High Range ; ADHD may be less of a handicap on untimed tests. IQ 135-140 is enough for any profession except exact scientific work. Interest and personality must be taken into account when choosing a profession.
Bravo, you bested the Schrodinger persiflage handily. And, thanks .I thought I knew what-the-Sam Hill your over-educated petitioner was yapping about but I wasnt sure he did his doggonedest to get us all messed up with his shell-game (ho, ho) electrons, and vacancies, and calculus, and orbits, and even the Commies. Probably, he just didnt know with whom he was dealing--THE ORACLE WITH A HOTLINE HARD-WIRED TO BABE-ISIS. Loathe to align myself with Smarty-pants, I do agree with this belief in free-will our man just doesnt know how to prove it. Sadly, neither do Iat the moment. But, Ill give it some more thought now to my more important question:
Who among these four guitar players is the most talented and why? A. Al Di Meola B. John Mclaughlin C. Carlos Santana D. Carlos Montoya
Neither meets the Oracle's standards for inclusion here.
According to the Schrodinger interpretation of probability density as it is applied to an electron which, in a sense, participates in a chemical reaction in the brain, this probability density, which we study in quantum mechanics, tells us that the electron does not orbit the nucleus of its atom the way a planet orbits a star, but rather, it spreads itself throughout its electron shell and forms a current flowing in this shell.
If an electron vacancy or anything else that will react with this electron in the course of a chemical reaction is placed within a part of this electron shell, it is only possible to calculate the probability that it will react with the electron. (This calculation involves a volume integral with the limits of integration determined by the size of whatever is brought into the electron shell to react with it. The integral also contains the complex conjugate of the solution to the Schrodinger equation operating upon the equation itself.)
Thus, whether or not a chemical reaction of an atom in a molecule in the brain might not be absolutely predictable even if all the physics about the electron that will set off a thought and expression of free will is known. Only the probability is known. Therefore, I am not prepared to dismiss the reasonable possibility that there is a physical such thing as free will and even a consciousness that transcends the physics of the electrons in our brains forming our thoughts. It is amusing to note that in January 1990, the journal, "Soviet Physics" published a party order that this Schrodinger interpretation was prohibited because it might undermine the party canonicality of atheism.
They demanded that probability density be interrelated as the probability that the electron, orbiting the nucleus as a planet orbiting its star, would be found in a volume specified by the limits of integration of the volume integral containing the complex conjugate of the Schrodinger equation operating upon the solution itself. There are many reasons this model does not work. The main problem with it is that an orbit containing such an electron is in effect a circular antenna with the alternating current of the orbiting electron. This would cause the electron to radiate electromagnetic energy and fall into the nucleus as it loses this energy. Also, only the Schrodinger model of the electron can take the shape of a perfectly directional antenna as it must do in order to transmit or to receive a photon. The Soviet model cannot do this.
If it is true that we do have a form of free will that is not constrained by laws of physics completely controlling the electrons in our brains, than this must certainly establish some degree of responsibility for our actions.
Awareness exists beyond doubt; free will is unproven. That individual electrons are not completely controlled by physics does not mean free will exists, for:
1 It merely shows there is a chance element, and chance does not imply free will;
2 The chance element on electron-scale is evened out on large scale. Like if you flip a coin once can't predict which side will show up, but if you flip it millions of times you know it will be extremely close to 50/50. The uncertainty of chance as good as disappears. And awareness is constituted by millions and billions of electron-events, leaving little room for chance, let alone free will.
Will I be happy?
Dear Oracle: You lead us to infer that you are placed between the hemiverses, this from an earlier divination. 1* How is this possible, given the construct of the Universe you and Isis have given us? As well, Isis seems to be a Goddess of some sort--she seems to be able to wander the fourth dimension at liberty, unconstrained by standard limitations of awareness. 2* How?
1* It is possible hypothetically only. The oracles come from entities inside the existing hemiverse, but are expressed through a hypothetical Oracle between the hemiverses.
2* Isis is not a goddess but a highly intelligent member of a technologically advanced race. Isis' technology is not unveiled at present, but stay alert.
How do we humans deal best with the harsh reality of war in the western world? I have no prior experience and I am scared!
Continue life as usual and follow instructions from authorities when applicable.
Dear Oracle: Fait Accompli per Webster is "a thing accomplished and presumably irreversible". Oracle knows this definition, we say it only so that Oracle does not think we have another definition in mind. Oracle has said that in human terms the future already exists. 1*
How is this not fait accompli?
By the way...haven't we asked about a Purpose to life?? I can't believe we have questions numbering now above 30. 2* Is there a Purpose?? We thought that a question like that was meaningless--as it meant we were comparing then the universe something outside the universe..which is meaningless 'cause there isn't anything outside the universe.
Oracle has told us that "nothing (in life) makes sense". 3* Would the Oracle please then elaborate? We see how "nothing makes sense" and (some)purpose
may not be mutually exclusive--as purposes may not be always known, know-able, or yet revealed.
4* Where do we go with all this? Clearly, the South Fork of the Megalom is
flummoxed about how we can have good, bad, purpose, responsibilily--all these excellent subjects of law and topics under the purview of Judge Q.--when all these essentially moral subjects are meaningless EXCEPT as some illusion needed to fuel our non-sensical existence.
1* Oracle does not recall saying "already". That would refer to time.
2* Only if you set one for yourself.
3* See 2*
4* Isis says one may find insight climbing the ranks of her Order, beginning at Neophytus.
Dear Oracle: Oracle affirms that there is no purpose to our lives, and all is fait accompli. Also, as a subset, specifically decreed is that we have no Free Will. On the other hand, and paradoxically, we have one Judge Q. who prescribes justice by formula: p = r times c squared; where r = responsibility.
How is anyone responsible for anything, if there is no Free Will? Can Judge
Q. have been enlightened by the Oracle, yet hold on to his basic equation?
Oracle never spoke of purpose to live and fait accompli.
Responsibility is part of the universe, just as the illusion of Free Will is. Judge Q. can hold on to equation. An individual's deeds and his illusory Free Will thereto are mechanisms through which his awareness perceives the universe.
Dear Oracle: Now yer talkin'!! I took a poll of the S.F. membership--they think you are on track--except...well, let's try this:
1. Past, Present, Future All exist "side by side"
2. There is only one, a singularity, of this existence (ie 4th Dimension is just that--and there aren't, say, two or three 4th dimensions). By the by, S.F. members have understood the previous Oracles (naturally at a very basic level).
Some of our members think that Free Will is...well, its own dimension of sorts. But let's not get hung up on that word, dimension. Free Will's existence--which means we shape the future by our actions--is not inconsistent with a one and definite future. 1* What does the Oracle think about that? We don't think it's illogical--that given outcomes may be freely derived.
1* Free Will is consistent with a definite future insofar one understands Free Will as a mental construct that enables us to perceive the universe in a way that is compatible with survival.
Alternatively, a form of Free Will is thinkable that creates a parallel universe with each choice, thus resulting in ever increasing numbers of universes as we go along.
Isis says both understandings are equally valid, but the actual universe resembles more the first than the latter as a result of between-universe forces that make choices gravitate to fit in "the" universe, leaving the parallel universes in a virtual state. Virtual here means they do not actually exist, but their forces act, thus preventing their actual existence.
Dear Oracle: Let's rephrase petition 28. Does the Oracle have any alternative logic (besides the seemingly meaningless "survival" syllogism) to help show that Free Will is an illusion?
Short progress report on S. Fork VS E+W Megs: S. Fork has hired E. Feel Baily as lead counsel. We maintain that East and West Megs have stolen our Free Will-y. We find we can't even give it away anymore!
Respectfully: Laguna Delfazio, Grand Poobah of S.F. Megs and Bonzai Kitten afficionado.
For alternative logic, one could consider that past, present and future as we know them are really existing next to each other in the universe. We only perceive them as consecutive because of our inability to perceive the 4th dimension in its true form. This has been explained extensively in prior Oracles.
In human terms this means the "future" "already" exists, and therefore free will with regard to what you will do can not exist.
Dear Oracle: The Oracle explained that Free Will is an illusion. As Oracle has debunked all traditional Gods who might run the show, I take the liberty of presuming there is no Magician involved in that particular sleight. Tangentially, it is good to know that the Universe will never cease to exist, a priori, since the Chinese government will never fall. That Government, however unaware of Human Rights, still has awareness and so.
Back to Free Will, you know, humans need air - so 1* is air an illusion? (That wasn't a question) I'm sure Oracle is "dead nuts on" about all this, but does he have any alternative logic to show that Free Will does not exist?
From: A member of the Antarctic/Southern Branch (South Fork) of the Megalom Society. South Fork, by the by, is suing both the East Coast and West Coast Megs.
Conclusion that Universe will never cease to exist is meaningless, as time is part of Universe. Universe is not happening against a time/space forum.
1* No (That wasn't an answer)
It cannot be proven Free Will does not exist as one cannot prove a negative; burden of proof lies with who claim it exists.