Why do Physics/Astronomy majors have such a significantly higher average IQ of 135? How is this the case...

Why do Physics/Astronomy majors have such a significantly higher average IQ of 135? How is this the case? What is so challenging about Physics that the average major has such a significantly higher IQ than literally all other majors?

Other urls found in this thread:

store.steampowered.com/app/489460/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_intelligence
aaup.org/article/why-are-we-still-worried-about-women-science#.WJev7dRkbSM
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019188691100002X
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

hmm why are the pioneers and trailblazers of modern society the smartest?

Wow, I'm near the bottom. Really makes you think.
t. Psychology major

The iq test is a pervsion of the achievement tests developed by Alfred Binet.
It's known that if a person has already taken the iq test before you have to adjust the next test since, otherwise your iq goes up every time you take.
Even a sub Saharan African that s given multiple iq tests, different actual test but still testing iq, he will eventually test as a genius proving once psychology is the work of anti scientist within socialism and eugenics movements

>It's known that if a person has already taken the iq test before you have to adjust the next test since, otherwise your iq goes up every time you take.
Welcome to every IQ test. People get better at things the more they perform them.

Every IQ test is biased towards scientists and mathematicians because they indirectly practise the things the test is about, giving them a huge edge.

These are estimates from GRE scores. Physics is basically PhD or bust, so maybe they just study the GRE more. Who the fuck knows, really. You could say it for any of those majors.

rote memorization vs critical thinking: the list

>estimated

stopped reading there.

So true

>IQ
>estimated from average GRE scores
>no error bars

RRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Why are we letting with the lowest IQ teach people?

Read the graph.

How are Physics and Astronomy majors smarter than Mathematics majors? Mathematics involves more abstraction and creativity.

They aren't, these are intended majors along with GRE scores, these are not graduates or even guaranteed entry into their major. It's a shit graph with no meaning and I'm disappointed people are falling for it without so much asking for a source.

It appears to be the case that men have a wider range of IQ distribution, meaning women and men average around 100, but men have more geniuses and retards than women.

This hypothesis seems to be the case with conditions like fragile X syndrome, in which males are more likely to show symptoms of retardation because they have one X chromosome, whereas women have two (of which one can compensate).

Since universities/colleges accept normal people and geniuses, whilst cutting off the retarded end of the IQ spectrum, it stands to reason that the subjects with the highest percentage of male students will have a higher average IQ.

Part of it also has to do with the GRE scores highly relying on mathematics, which males tend to do better in than females.

>GRE scores
In what? The regular test or the subject? I think that prospective physics grad students take these exams exceptionally seriously. It may have less to do with intelligence than rigor.

>This hypothesis seems to be the case with conditions like fragile X syndrome, in which males are more likely to show symptoms of retardation because they have one X chromosome, whereas women have two (of which one can compensate)
So your implication is that the men that are not retarded are smarter than women?

Can confirm, my iq score increased substantially after my undergraduate degree. But this is a chart of GRE score

IF, and ONLY IF, the information I've seen about IQ deviation based on gender is true then:

I'm implying that men are more likely to be retarded than women at a rate of X, and that men are more likely to be a genius than women at a rate of X.

Not that user but the comment still stands, education majors are mostly near the bottom.

Because no one wants the jobs despite there being a need for them. The most qualified candidates are either professors or people doing jobs for 2-4 times the pay.

At this point only the truly altruistic and desperate will take the jobs.

And no increasing the pay or privatizing the system won't fix the issue because going into Engineering and Medicine will always be more lucrative and respected. Meanwhile physics and math majors are way too proud to take a non-college teaching job and would rather take a finance job.

I don't even know what a GRE is top kök

because they need to rationalize that they went into a subject with 0 pratical application within their lifetime that somebody else will get the fame and money for while they starve on 6 months postdoc positions and all of that just because the black science man and a retard with funny necktie showed them a video about black holes and promised to uncover all the secrets of the universe

Math generally involves more abstraction, but more creativity is debatable.

Physicists are more rounded and score higher on measures of general intelligence, which include spatial and verbal components.

he isn't nona-majoring in math, physics, computer science, engineering, philosophy, chemistry, biology, eath science(s), and business


have fun never being a billionaire

how the fuck can you estimate IQ from GRE. that's the most retarded graph I've read in a while. Do you realize how easy it is to get an almost perfect GRE score if you are not retarded and you studied for it?

>tfw phd in astrology

brainlets feel free to leave this thread

lol how is GRE indicative of IQ it's a fucking terrible test

inb4 I got a bad score i was 90th percentile in all categories and my IQ is nothing special

Physics and Electrical engineering dual major reporting in, bow to me brainlets!

building boats is harder than rockets

Marine Engineering ftw

Please make me a marine equivalent of KSP, so I can verify this claim

store.steampowered.com/app/489460/

Math is now #1 based on more recent GRE tests.

>Astronomy Majors
>Intelligent

>computer science
>that high
but most undergrad cs majors are literal brainlet tier bullshitters who pretend to be smart but in reality struggle with babby tier maths
t. cs/maths dual major

>Math generally involves more abstraction, but more creativity is debatable
You have to be really creative to think deep enough to create stuff that is purely theorethical, yet cannot be denied. In physics you have to also be creative, but that involves a lot of experimentation and input from the outside. Mathematicians rely on their minds only, whereas physicists don't.

Also,
>Physicists are more rounded and score higher on measures of general intelligence, which include spatial and verbal components
Any source on this?

>my knowledge of IQ tests is stuck in the sixties

Why speak?

Maybe your perception is just skewed. Most people can't even do babby tier maths

>It appears to be the case that men have a wider range of IQ distribution, meaning women and men average around 100, but men have more geniuses and retards than women.
this is a wrong myth

ignore the bottom part

cont.

get your misogyny out of this board

>facts are misogyny
fuck off, this is a science board not a feelings board

This is racist capitalist bourgioise bullshit.

Dialectical materialism is the only real science, you right wingers and your "neuroscience" can fuck right off.

Not sure. Two theories:
1) People who are good at IQ tests are more attracted to studying mathematical subjects
2) People who study mathematical subjects get better at IQ tests

It's not that the top-tier majors make you smarter but it's the fact that they usually attract bright students

>Physics, Mathematics and Philosophy are the top 3
Why am I not surprised

>men having higher means from age 15 onwards
It seems that happens because as their grow older, women are pushed into being more emotional and disregard logic. That should be fixed if their mentality shifts.

Also,
>2x more mentally retarded women than men
How so? Men are more likely to be autistic than women.

Women have smaller brains because their have less muscles do coordinate.

you clearly didnt read it

already as children men have higher IQ but the gap widens with maturity

autism is a disorder. mental retardation is defined as having an IQ of below 70

>women have less muscles
post evidence
>Women have smaller brains because their have less muscles do coordinate
post evidence

not that you can or there would not be a significant IQ difference

>already as children men have higher IQ but the gap widens with maturity
My point that the gaps widens because there is a culture that makes women value more emotion than reason

>autism is a disorder. mental retardation is defined as having an IQ of below 70
Autism is a disorder which causes mental retardation

And I don't really have to post any evidence that women have more muscles. That's just common knowledge.
More muscles require more neurons. That's why neanderthals had bigger brains than homo sapiens. They had so many muscles they had to eat 3 times as much as us to maintain them. This is neuroscience 101. I didn't really have to explain it to you.

>inb4 neanderthals had bigger brains because they were smarter
Not even gonna argue with that.

>there is a culture that makes women value more emotion than reason
prove this

as long as you do not have empirical evidence for this claim it is worthless bullshit pulled out of your ass

>And I don't really have to post any evidence that women have more muscles
yes you do

all you do is make idiotic claims and dipshitting because you are unwilling to accept reality

>it's been fifty years since the problem was identified, therefore it must have been solved by now

You must be trolling or you are deeply autistic. Nearly everything I said is common knowledge. It's you who seems to be unwilling to accept reality.

GREEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

it demands more working memory to solve the most complex family of problems.

>common knowledge
not an argument

you sound like legit sub 100 IQ because you are unable to understand even basic logic. are you a woman by chance?

DUDE, THE UNIVERSE LMAO

well maybe that's just it, maybe that's what IQ really is, being able to do the things people working in STEM are able to do: think, analyse, be critical. maybe it isnt so bad after all. so its ok if it correlates.

This is pretty amusing. You're arguing that men aren't stronger than women because it serves your argument that men are smarter than women.
Going back to the image, do you think Elephants are twice as smart as Chimps, or does physical size play a part here?

not a misogynist but

>You're arguing that men aren't stronger than women
no I am not

I assume you are too unintelligent to tell the difference between number of muscles and size of muscles. if size of muscles itself mattered then bodybuilders would have by far the largest brains and your absurd claim would be very easy to verify by analyzing a bodybuilder's brain

also, you make ridiculous claims about brain function. you pretend that basic brain structure is the same for every species and that differences in size are explained by difference in muscle mass, which is not true. however, basic brain structure between men and women is pretty much the same so comparing those two is valid. thus, when you see that men have not just significantly more neurons but also about 50% more synapses in parts of the brain responsible for logical thinking than women you can assume that this is due to a difference in intelligence, which is indeed confirmed by IQ tests, instead of blaming "muuh more muscles"

that's why I said you are incapable of basic logical thinking and probably sub 100 IQ

Let's clarify what we even mean about creativity first.

Originality? Inventiveness? Productivity thereof?

Which is more creative is hard to compare. That is why I said mathematics is not necessarily more creative. Mathematicians are only more creative at math.

Their verbal, spatial, and mathematical ability vary less from each other. More likely to be well-versed in a variety of subjects and fields.

>But I am a bad statistician.

More studies lean towards men and women having the same IQs. It's basically just Lynn that calims otherwise and his little experiment got btfo apparently.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_intelligence

>wikipedia

>not using wikipedia as an entry point for building up sources in research
Confirmed for shit tier undergrad.

You are legit confused if you don't think larger people have larger motor regions in their cortex.

Yeah, women also have thinner ischiadicus nerves GO FIGURE

It sums up the citations, studies of both sides quite well.

So now that Lynn is done for, what alternative hypothesis can we form?

I am a nearly autistic kissless virgin. Definitely not a woman, m8.
If you need proofs of stuff that is accepted even among the most uneducated folk, you are far from any help.
I'm gonna stop replying you now.

>5 point IQ gap
Yeah nah.

you are shit tier if you rely on wikipedia like some stupid lazy high schooler

>I linked to wikipedia, now everything is settled
that's what idiots actually believe. no need to link to actual studies or explain why the studies posted above are invalid. wikipedia is notoriously bad on issues that in any way can be seen as related to politics and using wikipedia as source just shows your own bias and stupidity

I can't take that pic seriously.
Criminal justice = low verbal and low math?
Also, all the autistic screeching fields get high on verbal scores?
Planetary science on the same level as creative writing? Half of physics above drama? Comeon.

Forgot to attach pic

>>I linked to wikipedia, now everything is settled
Stop playing dumb, that isn't the point.
There is links to studies, lynn has been BTFO and that's your main source.

What shows your bias is just using Lynn and not looking at both sides. Unlike you I'm not with an agenda and I know there doesn't necessarily have to be a 5 POINT IQ GAP for men to be more likely (biologically + culture) to do science

Now get packing.

Creativity = ability to think of new stuff "randomly" (not really random, but definitiely not in a logical way)

>Mathematicians are only more creative at math.
Well, I could argue that physicists are only more creative at physics. That doesn't mean anything.
The comparison you should make is which requires more creativity: mathematics or physics?
Obviously people will be more creative in the fields they are working at, due to the amount of knowledge they gathered through time. But there are fields in which you need more creativity to excell than in others.
However, I do think that the creativity (and other skills involved) needed to master mathematics is the same needed to master physics. What, IMO, makes mathematics harder is the abstraction needed.

>that's your main source
no its not

see , lynn not among them

>Russian
How is that listed as a distinct subject? lel

Because all of the really intelligent people are busy with their janitorial jobs.

This image is extremely accurate.

>nothing about IQ
You are jumping back and forth here.

Women and men are different, this doesn't mean they need to have different IQ's.

Lynn is kind of a biased bullshitter and you should, imo based on the larger data, disregard his stuff.

>autists
>normies

>freshman detected

>secondary education
>developmental psychology
>sociology
>pol
>art history

>not retards

okay I will take that to heart and one day when I have the time look into it myself

obviously this topic is very prone to bias and bad "science" because it goes against pc culture of everyone being equal, IQ is an imperfect measurement of intelligence and a lot of other problems such as "adjusted" IQ tests

I will not deny though that I expect a significant gap in intelligence to exist and translate into IQ test performance because men have more neurons and higher synapse density and larger areas related to logical thinking. men also are responsible for the large majority of contributions to technological and scientific progress and greatly outperform women even in competitions that don't involve strength, such as chess or video games. so a difference in intelligence to exist sounds more plausible to me than "male and female brains have significant differences but it just happens to be that their intelligence is exactly the same"

of course there are alternative explanations but none seem to quite make up for this vast gap in performance especially because twin studies show intelligence is not affected by environmental factors. a frequent excuse I hear is that women are "oppressed". however, I heard that jews for example when they fled from the holocaust to the USA, in spite of severe opression and leaving everything behind needed only 4 years to reach average economic performance and later outperformed other groups, especially in science and technology

>More studies lean towards men and women having the same IQs.

Yeah sure.

>>women have less muscles
>post evidence
go outside

>More studies lean towards men and women having the same IQs.
Nature doesn't do equal.

Please stop this.

i just took an IQ testand it says i have 140.
i am actually (for now) pretty good in phisycs at school

>electrical engineering has a lower IQ than physics
>I can quite literally take 3 extra classes on quantum mechanics and get a physics degree along with my EE degree

why is physics more math than mathematics

>however, I heard that jews for example when they fled from the holocaust to the USA, in spite of severe opression and leaving everything behind needed only 4 years to reach average economic performance and later outperformed other groups, especially in science and technology
Are you really drawing a comparison to jews? The ones that migrated to America had connections and brought their culture of education and hard and smart working.
Women have been historically undermined on their pursuits for knowledge, wealth and power.

you use more math in physics than you do in math.

Oh god no, please tell me you're not actually serious. Please show me proof that those undermined had any potential in the first place to be intelligent.

Women who did contribute to science were also intelligent to not care about what anyone thought. As well, show me a distinct correlation between when societies opinion on women changed and a growth in female science majors that ISN'T also directly proportional with our population increase.

90th percentile IQ is nothing particularly special tho

>cranial volume
>not cranial density
hahahaha

aaup.org/article/why-are-we-still-worried-about-women-science#.WJev7dRkbSM
>Over the past three decades, the overall percentage of women receiving degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics—known collectively as the STEM disciplines—has increased dramatically.
I feel like I should highlight the percentage part, so you know that it's not just about pure numbers.

>Women who did contribute to science were also intelligent to not care about what anyone thought.
Caring about what other people think has to do with EQ, not IQ. It has to do with emotion. You can be a huge genius and yet care a lot about what other people think.

>Nature doesn't do equal.
ok that's a retarded statement if I ever saw one..
what about how psi(r) behaves as r -> +/- inf??

I'm still reading it but from what I've seen, they've already made an unfair comparison by claiming that

"If this were the case, then female STEM students would underperform their male counterparts in college and graduate school. The data show the contrary: women outperform men academically, receive more awards, and have higher graduation rates"


When in the previous table it was already shown that women underperformed men in all STEM fields except for biology, which is often mocked as not being STEM.

also, a 5 point IQ gap means little to nothing.
besides..
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019188691100002X

Too add to that, it appears there is a genetic predisposition towards women desiring families more than careers

"If the woman is married with young children, she is 30 percent less likely than a single man to be employed.

Women’s biological clocks often mean that decisions about marriage and children cannot be delayed until after their careers have been well established."

I don't see how this indicates any social oppression as much as biological tendencies.


" because 83 percent of women scientists have academic partners who are scientists compared with 54 percent of their male peers"

This should also indicate an increased value among male scientists socially for intelligent women, which again would decrease the argument of social oppression. However these are current day statistics compared to about a hundred years ago.

Regardless, I'll have to compare the amount of men in the total population pursuing these STEM careers vs women in the total population pursuing STEM careers. That will indicate the actual interest of women in stem vs men in stem.