Oh, jeez. The memories...
1968, riding a Yamaha 175 with Gyt Kit in the Jack Piner Enduro when
I hit a log, went 15 feet in the air and did TWO backflips, keeping my
feet on the pedals, shifted down in mid-air to compensate for the loss
of speed, and landed upright to finish the race...of course I won,
beating all the Bultacos , Huskies, Montesas and several former world
Ah, to live in Gunner's Walter Mitty fantasy world. <g>
Yeah, and here it is:
It was a fully-enclosed Bonneville streamliner with twin turbocharged
engines, you freaking idiot.
By the Ack Attack, another multi-engined, supercharged Bonneville
On a Ninja, no doubt -- since you claim to have beaten the world
record for Ninjas by 33 mph. d8-)
One of the car record holders, perhaps Donald Campbell, realized the
futility of it when he was comfortably flying home, eating supper, and heard
the stewardess announce their speed which was over 100 MPH faster than the
record he had nearly died for.
A 1934 contest between custom British racing planes and US-built airliners,
one flying its regular route with passengers:
Hmmm, but many of those require some knowledge of the physics
involved. I don't believe it's a very good test of reasoning power in
As a mechanical type of guy, with a lot of electronics background on
top of it, I answered all of those almost in knee-jerk fashion. There
wasn't a lot of reasoning. I've seen them all before, and I've been
tripped up by the pulley questions before <g>, so I knew how to
It really is tough to construct any conventional test that isolates
intelligence from knowledge.
With all due respect to Gunner, I am still laughing. d8-)
Culture effects are also a confounding influence. The best tests of
pure intelligence involve tests of reasoning without words, like those
asking one to find the object that best "fits in" a set of other similar
but different objects presented as examples. There is a large
literature on such things.
The most interesting tests are those made to assess animal intelligence.
There is also a literature on this.
They are not the same. I have seen lots of analyses by PhD engineers
that were rendered nonsense because the engineer didn't know this or
that practical detail or effect, usually one outside their area of
specialty. The math was perfect, though.
Knowledge without intelligence: Sure. It's called Common Sense, and
Cunning if it's knowledge (or instinct, it doesn't matter) about human
Intelligence without knowledge: In the absolute, no. One must know
something, although many kinds of knowledge are innate. But, as in my
example of the PhD engineer above, one may be highly intelligent and yet
not know enough.
But, more generally, we are confusing intelligence with effectiveness.
We have all met people who were highly intelligence, and yet are totally
ineffectual; and people who sound like idiots, and yet always seem to
manage to achieve whatever they were attempting.
How does this work? My theory is that effective people somehow
understand how the world really works, covering both human behaviour and
technology/science, and so spend little time tilting at windmills.
Yes. Intelligence is, among other things, an ability to see the
relationships between items of knowledge.
Yes, for instance, the Shelly Long character on "Cheers", or our own
Hawwk-Ptooey with his oh so precious poli sci BA.
Mensa has developed tests for preliterate children which seem to
accurately reflect scores achieved later in life. Not really an answer,
though, intelligence needs something to work with and preliterate
doesn't mean they haven't already learned useful things.
One of the problems, #31 I think, originally had 2 square boxes sitting
on the balance beam. It threw everyone off, including the author of the
test - there was *no* correct answer among the choices given.
The author corrected the error by making the problem easier, with
triangles standing on their pointy ends replacing the boxes.
Here is the original version below. Can anyone answer it?
Two square boxes, 2 units in width.
Box A occupies first boxwidth space left of fulcrum.
Box B occupies third boxwidth space right of fulcrum.
| | | |
|A | |B |
If box A weighs 300 kg, how much does box B weigh?
 50 kg
 100 kg
 150 kg
 300 kg
They will if they had a course in statics, centroids, and the law of
I see your point, and I agree that knowledge and intelligence are not
the same thing, as well as your point that one can have one without
When you look at the statistics, however, you find that the
correlations on the whole are very strong. Intelligent people tend to
be very curious people. And the not-so-intelligent people who are
willing to work extra hard to conquer difficult subjects are not
There are some, of course, and they tend to have good discipline or
other positive traits. Hats off to them. Just don't let them cloud the
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.