PDA

View Full Version : STATEMENTS ABOUT IQ'S AND ASTRONOMY



Danger
2004-Jun-22, 12:24 AM
YOU WILL OFTEN SEE IN NEWSPAPERS AND TV WHERE SOMEONE QUOTES AN IQ, LIKE 300 OR SOMETHING TO SHOW HOW INTELLIGENT THIS PERSON IS. IT MEANS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING UNLESS YOU KNOW WHICH STANDARDIZED TEST IT WAS. I COULD GET A SCORE ON ONE TEST WITH A 147 AND BE A GENIOUS AND ANOTHER I COULD BE AN ABSOLUTE IDIOT. STANDARDIZATION MEANS THE "PERCENTILE" YOU HAVE TO YOUR PEERS....AND THE PERCENTILE IS THE ONLY FIGURE THAT SAYS ANYTHING AT ALL. REMEMBER THAT!

I IMAGINE BY NOW THAT YOU THINK I AM REALLY OFF BASE, RIGHT? WRONG!

READ AN ARTICLE IN HERE BY SOMEONE WHO SAYS THEY ARE AN ASTRONOMER. THE STATEMENT SAID THAT THE SUMMER SOLSTICE WAS WHEN THE SUN WAS THE FARTHEST DEGREE TO THE NORTH. GOOD....BUT NOT GOOD ENOUGH TO PASS.

THE SUMMER SOLSTICE, SPECIFICALLY, COMES WHEN ARIES IS ON THE ASCENDANT. I DON'T CARE HOW FAR NORTH OR SOUTH THE POLE IS, ARIES ON THE ASCENDANT IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE FIRST DAY OF SUMMER....OFFICIALLY. SO FAR, ARIES ON THE HORIZON AND THE FARTHEST NORTH THE SUN HAVE COINCIDED TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.

NOW GO AHEAD AND TEAR ME APPART WITH THAT ONE!

SeanF
2004-Jun-22, 12:30 AM
First, welcome to the board! :D

Second, DON'T SHOUT! The Caps Lock key is your enemy. Rip it off your keyboard and lock it up somewhere until you learn to type without it.

Third, the Solstices and Equinoxes are determined by the Earth's orbit around the Sun. The Summer Solstice is when the Earth's axis is tilted directly towards the Sun, and thus the Sun reaches its highest point in the sky.

The positions of the constellations in the sky on the Summer Solstice do change slowly (we're talking thousands of years), but the solstices and equinoxes will always depend on the Sun, not the constellations.

Fourth, IQ tests by definition are standardized to 100 being the median (50th percentile).

beskeptical
2004-Jun-22, 01:07 AM
..... The Summer Solstice is when the Earth's axis is tilted directly towards the Sun, and thus the Sun reaches its highest point in the sky......in the Northern hemisphere for summer where I am, and, the Southern hemisphere for summer where the Aussies are. Which, in the case of constellations in line with the 'Sun-->Earth--> x or y Constellation', would not be the same for both hemispheres.

What brings you to make the statement, "ARIES ON THE ASCENDANT IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE FIRST DAY OF SUMMER....OFFICIALLY", Danger? And, what does it have to do with IQs?

Summer solstice is an astronomical term. Perhaps you are referring to a religious or other designation of 'the first day of summer"?

ToSeek
2004-Jun-22, 01:52 AM
Isn't Aries on the horizon an average of once a day? (Twice if you count both rising and setting, but I gather you're just talking about rising.) And doesn't it make a significant difference where you are whether Aries is on the horizon or not?

EDIT: Anyhow, you're wrong, regardless. The summer solstice was at 8:57 pm last night, and Aries didn't rise until about 1:50 am this morning.

stu
2004-Jun-22, 02:04 AM
Third, the Solstices and Equinoxes are determined by the Earth's orbit around the Sun. The Summer Solstice is when the Earth's axis is tilted directly towards the Sun, and thus the Sun reaches its highest point in the sky.

Don't you mean it's when Earth's axis is tilted most directly at the sun (23.5)? Otherwise, we'd be in a situation like Uranus.

Or is my major headache making me not comprehend this? #-o

SeanF
2004-Jun-22, 02:54 AM
Third, the Solstices and Equinoxes are determined by the Earth's orbit around the Sun. The Summer Solstice is when the Earth's axis is tilted directly towards the Sun, and thus the Sun reaches its highest point in the sky.

Don't you mean it's when Earth's axis is tilted most directly at the sun (23.5)?
Well, the Earth is always tilted at 23.5 from the ecliptic. It's pointing towards the Sun on the Summer solstice and away from the Sun on the Winter. It's pointed 90 off of the Sun-Earth line on the Equinoxes.

The Bad Astronomer
2004-Jun-22, 03:39 AM
I am the one who said the Sun is farthest north on this day. It's on the main page of the site (though soon I'll take it off and move it to the "What's New" section). I run this whole website.

Anyway, I am right. The Sun appears to move north and south over the year due to the Earth's tilt. The solstice is not defined by a constellation. That would be silly, as the constellations move with respect to our coordinate system due to precession. As an example, the First Point in Aries is supposed to represent the location of the spring equinox. Because of precession, that point is now in Pisces, and will soon be in Aquarius (ushering in the Age of Aquarius, if you are so inclined... I am not).

So Aries has nothing to do with it. The summer solstice is defined as the point when the Sun reaches its northenmost point in the sky as measured in declination. This information is readily available on the web; try here (http://aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/docs/seasons_orbit.html) or here (http://www.analemma.com).

Finally, it's not a great idea to come to someone's website and say they are wrong. It's best to come in and ask if perhaps you misunderstood. :-?

stu
2004-Jun-22, 04:24 AM
I think it's interesting that the one of the Google ads at the bottom of the page is about dream interpretations (at least when I loaded it after the BA's post).

paulie jay
2004-Jun-22, 06:51 AM
I COULD GET A SCORE ON ONE TEST WITH A 147 AND BE A GENIOUS AND ANOTHER I COULD BE AN ABSOLUTE IDIOT.

I suggest you stop doing the ego boosting pretend IQ tests offered on the World Wide Web and go and get tested properly. Then all doubt will surely be erased :)

Kaptain K
2004-Jun-22, 07:33 AM
IQ scores are like the marks on a measuring cup. They are an indication of capacity. They say nothing about the contents

Swift
2004-Jun-22, 12:34 PM
IQ scores are like the marks on a measuring cup. They are an indication of capacity. They say nothing about the contents
=D>
That's a keeper!

Emspak
2004-Jun-22, 03:45 PM
Am I the only person who wonders what IQ tests are supposed to measure, anyway?

A good definition of 'intelligence' doesn't seem to me to be in the cards. Much of it I think has to do with how well educated one is, interests, etc.

For example, a professional baseball player -- say, Alex Rodriguez -- might score low on any standard IQ test because he hasn't the tools to solve certain problems. After all, the methods aren't instinctive, and before I learned any geometry many of those problems would be opaque to me as well. Yet he can calculate the velocity of a baseball hit towards him, make a good estimate of the time he has to throw it to beat the guy heading to first -- and he doesn't have to think about it. Is he dumber? He's done all that work empirically, based on long experience on the field and a certain athletic ability.

I have never seen an IQ test that measures much that is terribly useful -- especially not the ones they give out when you apply for certain jobs. :-)

Has anyone come up with a good, quantitative method for measuring ability? Is there one?

I was thinking about it because I was watching "Good Will Hunting" and thinking of the way people view genius and intellectual ability. I have never met anyone who could not understand science, given the tools to do so. Same goes for reading or whatever else. I've never met anyone who was able to self-teach organic chemistry.

The trick seems to be in the tools given -- I used to know a lot of kids who could speak perfectly grammatical Spanish and English (a darn sight more than most Amercians can do), but had a heck of a time with reading because they just hadn't done much of it early on.

I dunno. Thoughts on thoughts?

TriangleMan
2004-Jun-22, 04:15 PM
I took psychology in college and took a course that, in part, dealt with the formation of IQ tests and their weaknesses. By and large I believe that IQ tests are bunk. It is very difficult to design a proper one because many of them wind up testing trivia knowledge rather than intelligence (and what is "intelligence" anyway, it is not an easy thing to define). Cultural and educational differences can also have a significant effect on IQ scores, for example a smart person with a reading disability. I also don't like IQ tests because in quantifying intelligence people inevitably compare scores, which leads to someone being smarter or dumber than the other, even though in reality it is not as cut-and-dried.

01101001
2004-Jun-22, 04:42 PM
For example, a professional baseball player -- say, Alex Rodriguez -- might score low on any standard IQ test because he hasn't the tools to solve certain problems. After all, the methods aren't instinctive, and before I learned any geometry many of those problems would be opaque to me as well. Yet he can calculate the velocity of a baseball hit towards him, make a good estimate of the time he has to throw it to beat the guy heading to first -- and he doesn't have to think about it. Is he dumber? He's done all that work empirically, based on long experience on the field and a certain athletic ability.
Baseball? Could you pick a worse example? Baseball is the game of statistics. Rodriguez (http://newyork.yankees.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/team/player.jsp?player_id=121347) is measured on his baseball skills in hundreds of different ways. It helps Steinbrenner know how much to pay him. It helps Rodriguez know what areas he needs to work on, and how to cover his weaknesses with other skills.

Without measurement statistics, you'd be the equal of Rodriguez and belong on the Yankees right beside him. I don't think many fans would want to watch those games.

Emspak
2004-Jun-22, 04:58 PM
Well, I was thinking of the fact that while baseball is a game of statistics, measuring intelligence is a much different deal. That's why I chose baseball as an example -- there are a lot of quantitative ways to measure results on the field. Just as there are quantitative ways to measure whether I pass a calculus exam. But none of it tells you much about whether someone in the future will be good at some or other task.

I am not and never will be a player like A-rod (or my personal favorite, Nomar, but I am from Boston :-)) not just because of whatever "natural" ability, but becuase those guys have done nothing but practice baseball technique for 15 years, and I haven't. They have used just as much of their brains as anyone else, but their knowledge of baseball is based on all that accumulated practice and experience (hence it is empirical rather than deductive). A-Rod and Nomar don't do mass/velocity calculations in their heads. They do know what to look for through a thousand repetitions, and can "see" better than I ever will whether or not the runner is going to try for second or they should make the throw to first, whether they should try the throw, and is that liner coming to them or should they run to cover a base while the outfielder goes for the ball.

So no, I do not belong on the Yankees squad. But A-Rod doesn't belong on the Math teaching staff at CalTech, nor would he make a terribly great writer abou pension plans and finance (my job). And I would make a terrible lumberjack, welder, telephone repairman, or any of a thousand other jobs that require an awful lot of information or technique to do right.

Does that make mroe sense? Am I a nut?

ToSeek
2004-Jun-22, 05:14 PM
For example, a professional baseball player -- say, Alex Rodriguez -- might score low on any standard IQ test because he hasn't the tools to solve certain problems. After all, the methods aren't instinctive, and before I learned any geometry many of those problems would be opaque to me as well. Yet he can calculate the velocity of a baseball hit towards him, make a good estimate of the time he has to throw it to beat the guy heading to first -- and he doesn't have to think about it. Is he dumber? He's done all that work empirically, based on long experience on the field and a certain athletic ability.
Baseball? Could you pick a worse example? Baseball is the game of statistics. Rodriguez (http://newyork.yankees.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/team/player.jsp?player_id=121347) is measured on his baseball skills in hundreds of different ways. It helps Steinbrenner know how much to pay him. It helps Rodriguez know what areas he needs to work on, and how to cover his weaknesses with other skills.

Without measurement statistics, you'd be the equal of Rodriguez and belong on the Yankees right beside him. I don't think many fans would want to watch those games.

I do not see how your response matches the comments. Emspak was talking only about how Rodriguez would perform on intelligence tests, not whether he could be evaluated objectively at all.

My feeling is that what IQ tests primarily measure is one's ability to answer questions on IQ tests. ;)

George
2004-Jun-22, 06:41 PM
I'm curious. When are IQ tests required? Are they a prerequisite for honors classes or something? I finally took one just for fun and did pretty dang good (much to my suprise and, probably, yours). :)

[added... I kind'a like 'em a little better now. :) ]

Bob
2004-Jun-22, 07:02 PM
I am the one who said the Sun is farthest north on this day. ...The solstice is not defined by a constellation.

Yes, but...

The solstice was defined by a constellation, sort of. On the summer solstice the Sun is directly overhead at noon on the tropic of cancer, latitude 23.5 degrees or so. The tropic of cancer is so named because when this was first figured out, the Sun was in the constellation Cancer on the date of the summer solstice. Nowadays, due to precession, the Sun is in Capricorn on that date.

milli360
2004-Jun-22, 07:10 PM
Bob:
Nowadays, due to precession, the Sun is in Capriocorn on that date.
Gemini.

Or have I missed 10,000 years? :)

Bob
2004-Jun-22, 07:16 PM
[quote]
Gemini.
Or have I missed 10,000 years? :)

Gemini it is.

Donnie B.
2004-Jun-22, 09:08 PM
Am I the only person who wonders what IQ tests are supposed to measure, anyway?
Hardly. See The Mismeasure of Man by Stephen Jay Gould.

Dr. Gould also wondered about such things as cranium volume as a gauge of "intelligence", and the fact that, as you suggest, "intelligence" is not something that can be boiled down to a single number.

I think you'd enjoy the read.

Brady Yoon
2004-Jun-22, 09:11 PM
I took an IQ test when I entered an elementary honors program. I scored 142, which is wildly inconsistent with internet tests I took. Once, it said my IQ was 170! I don't think so. :roll: They don't want to make anyone feel bad, obviously.

The Bad Astronomer
2004-Jun-22, 11:01 PM
Folks, IQ discussions can be relegated to BABBling, please. Keep this one to the topic of the solstice. Eyes on the prize.

beskeptical
2004-Jun-22, 11:17 PM
Folks, IQ discussions can be relegated to BABBling, please. Keep this one to the topic of the solstice. Eyes on the prize.And here I was thinking the hijacked thread was sort of OK in the case of Mr D's choice to flame and run. :evil:

Other 2 of Danger's 3 posts. (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=283823#283823)

George
2004-Jun-22, 11:58 PM
His topic title hasn't helped either.....STATEMENTS ABOUT IQ'S AND ASTRONOMY. We shoud have known better than get sucked in. :cry:

AstroSmurf
2004-Jun-23, 09:17 AM
There isn't a whole lot to debate either. OP is wrong, BA is right.

Why? Cuz I sed so, is why! :P
(this argument is on about the same level as the original post...)

Emspak
2004-Jun-23, 02:08 PM
BA i right, I shouldn't have let the IQ discussion lead me astray.

As for the solstice, and this guy Danger, was he horribly beaten up by a bunch of lowercase letters?

The solstice is an interesting timekeeping device, but what else does it tell us? I really am asking that one -- I understand that if you are planting crops and such it helps to know when the sun is highest above the local horizon as that will tell you the days will start getting shorter. Imprtant if you work in the fields, surely. Many plants have cycles tied to the soltice, approximately, so that makes sense too.

Bu is it useful in astronomical calculations of the kind Kepler or Copernicus (or whoever, I am just making those two up as examples) did?

Laser Jock
2004-Jun-23, 02:56 PM
I would say that the summer solstice occurs when the sun reaches the top of this (http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040621.html) curve.

Danger also has some interesting posts (http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=283823&highlight=#283823) over in the Lunar Conspiricies forum.

milli360
2004-Jun-23, 03:12 PM
I would say that the summer solstice occurs when the sun reaches the top of this (http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040621.html) curve.

Not that one. It has to be at "local noon".

ToSeek
2004-Jun-23, 05:47 PM
I would say that the summer solstice occurs when the sun reaches the top of this (http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040621.html) curve.

Not that one. It has to be at "local noon".

Well, strictly speaking, Laser Jock is correct. It's just that it won't be noon when the Sun is exactly at the top of the curve, though it's probably too close to tell the difference.

milli360
2004-Jun-23, 06:25 PM
I would say that the summer solstice occurs when the sun reaches the top of this (http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040621.html) curve.

Not that one. It has to be at "local noon".

Well, strictly speaking, Laser Jock is correct. It's just that it won't be noon when the Sun is exactly at the top of the curve, though it's probably too close to tell the difference.
I'm pretty sure my chronometer (http://www.stlukeseye.com/Anatomy.asp) is capable of it. :)

That analemma (http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Solar-Analemma-140000.htm) was taken at 4pm local time, each day.