Your network blocks the Lichess assets!

lichess.org
Donate

Want to be a grandmaster in chess? Choose your parents wisely.

@The_ERuptodon said in #2:

96 or i am lost

Some say 40, but you are correct: 96

@The_ERuptodon said in #2: > 96 or i am lost Some say 40, but you are correct: 96

For anyone interested why it is 96: Instead of interpreting "a+b" as "a plus b", read it as "a*(b+1)". At least that is the pattern I recognize.

Note that with this interpretation, a+b is not the same as b+a.

For anyone interested why it is 96: Instead of interpreting "a+b" as "a plus b", read it as "a*(b+1)". At least that is the pattern I recognize. Note that with this interpretation, a+b is not the same as b+a.

Article started and ended well by bringing healthy perspective for young kids.

In the middle, you just devolved into pseudo-science.

IQ score is pointless for most causal relationships above mean/average IQ. Its creation and current scientific use is to identify kids/adults with learning difficulties, the rest is for marketing and for eugenicists.

Do genes matter? of course. To what extent? nobody truly knows. How heritable are they? Not conclusive - also, ever heard of reversion to the mean - how do you unravel that little problem?

Article started and ended well by bringing healthy perspective for young kids. In the middle, you just devolved into pseudo-science. IQ score is pointless for most causal relationships above mean/average IQ. Its creation and current scientific use is to identify kids/adults with learning difficulties, the rest is for marketing and for eugenicists. Do genes matter? of course. To what extent? nobody truly knows. How heritable are they? Not conclusive - also, ever heard of reversion to the mean - how do you unravel that little problem?

este blok no muy me llamo la atencion pero en el que explicabas porque los niños cometen errores me encanto

este blok no muy me llamo la atencion pero en el que explicabas porque los niños cometen errores me encanto

a + b = result + previous result..... 40 is correct answer too! There are often multiple solutions to these problems, and sometimes it's hard to determine which is better. Just because the author intended something, doesn't necessarily mean it's the best answer.

a + b = result + previous result..... 40 is correct answer too! There are often multiple solutions to these problems, and sometimes it's hard to determine which is better. Just because the author intended something, doesn't necessarily mean it's the best answer.

I got 96. Here is why:

First, I notice that something was missing,

1 + 4 = 5
2 + 5 = 12
3 + 6 = 21

8 + 11 = ?

So I filled those up:

1 + 4 = 5
2 + 5 = 12
3 + 6 = 21
4 + 7 =
5 + 8 =
6 + 9 =
7 + 10 =
8 + 11 = ?

Now, I thought the answer was adding the previous answer with the next odd numbers. The first answer is 5, then the next is 12 and the next is 21. 5 + 7 = 12, then 12 + 9 = 21. So I thought maybe you add 11, then add 13, then add 15, then add 17.... and this is what I got:

1 + 4 = 5
2 + 5 = 12
3 + 6 = 21 (+ 11 = 32)
4 + 7 = 32 (+ 13 = 45)
5 + 8 = 45 (+ 15 = 60)
6 + 9 = 60 (+ 17 = 77)
7 + 10 = 77 (+19 = 96)
8 + 11 = 96

I got 96. Here is why: First, I notice that something was missing, 1 + 4 = 5 2 + 5 = 12 3 + 6 = 21 ------------------ 8 + 11 = ? So I filled those up: 1 + 4 = 5 2 + 5 = 12 3 + 6 = 21 4 + 7 = 5 + 8 = 6 + 9 = 7 + 10 = 8 + 11 = ? Now, I thought the answer was adding the previous answer with the next odd numbers. The first answer is 5, then the next is 12 and the next is 21. 5 + 7 = 12, then 12 + 9 = 21. So I thought maybe you add 11, then add 13, then add 15, then add 17.... and this is what I got: 1 + 4 = 5 2 + 5 = 12 3 + 6 = 21 (+ 11 = 32) 4 + 7 = 32 (+ 13 = 45) 5 + 8 = 45 (+ 15 = 60) 6 + 9 = 60 (+ 17 = 77) 7 + 10 = 77 (+19 = 96) 8 + 11 = 96

@woopdidoodoo said in #5:

Article started and ended well by bringing healthy perspective for young kids.

In the middle, you just devolved into pseudo-science.

IQ score is pointless for most causal relationships above mean/average IQ. Its creation and current scientific use is to identify kids/adults with learning difficulties, the rest is for marketing and for eugenicists.

Do genes matter? of course. To what extent? nobody truly knows. How heritable are they? Not conclusive - also, ever heard of reversion to the mean - how do you unravel that little problem?

I absolutely agree with you. Some people are gifted with good genes but by the end of the day, we should not laud them and condemned the ungifted. This is especially true to the bias media about appearance. Only if the majority of the population would think and blindly believe the stupid media.

@woopdidoodoo said in #5: > Article started and ended well by bringing healthy perspective for young kids. > > In the middle, you just devolved into pseudo-science. > > IQ score is pointless for most causal relationships above mean/average IQ. Its creation and current scientific use is to identify kids/adults with learning difficulties, the rest is for marketing and for eugenicists. > > Do genes matter? of course. To what extent? nobody truly knows. How heritable are they? Not conclusive - also, ever heard of reversion to the mean - how do you unravel that little problem? I absolutely agree with you. Some people are gifted with good genes but by the end of the day, we should not laud them and condemned the ungifted. This is especially true to the bias media about appearance. Only if the majority of the population would think and blindly believe the stupid media.
<Comment deleted by user>