IQ or logic related question to ask!

[Vhtfhwlego]

For real IQ test, try this:

 

http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf

 

Prepare to spend 40 mins on it.

 

I got 122.

I once tried a FB IQ test. I got 136.

Later I curse myself for trying the test as I need to pay real money to know the results.

[Nzy]

For real IQ test, try this:

 

http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf

 

Prepare to spend 40 mins on it.

 

I got 122.

 

Are these tests accurate?

[Vid]

 

Are these tests accurate?

 

Not really. Real IQ tests have more questions and include different areas. This one only has shapes and patterns.

[Nzy]

 

Not really. Real IQ tests have more questions and include different areas. This one only has shapes and patterns.

 

Yeah. Decided to give it a go and realised all patterns only. Doesn't take long. 39 questions only. Takes about 10-15min to do. But they give 40min.

[Kusje]

I once tried a FB IQ test. I got 136.

Later I curse myself for trying the test as I need to pay real money to know the results.

 

You mean you paid?

 

Like that your IQ can't be 136.....

 

Not really. Real IQ tests have more questions and include different areas. This one only has shapes and patterns.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven's_Progressive_Matrices

[Angcheek]

 

You mean you paid?

 

Like that your IQ can't be 136.....

 

 

 

so shld be higher or lower hahaha

[Vhtfhwlego]

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="Kusje" data-cid="5466306" data-time="1429540035">Kusje, on 20 Apr 2015 - 10:27 PM, said:<p> You mean you paid? Like that your IQ can't be 136..... <p>Ya lor. I realize how dumb I were after paying.

[Ahseng]

You take a plane ride. While plane is already flying, u jump vertically. Will u crash into the the space behind u when u land? or still same spot?

 

same tricks as the fly lol

[Thaiyotakamli]

More simple example

 

If u have a hanging amulet in the car, will the amulet swing backward when u travel 100kmh?

[Yewheng]

I have this logic. It is acceleration and deceleration that move the object. object will remain stable with constant speed.

 

So perhaps the fly inside the car starting need to counter the acceleration force, so when car move accelerate, the fly will try best to fly to counter the force if not it will smack to the windscreen. However due to that acceleration is spread in more then 10 seconds to get up to speed, the acceleration force is not a lot and can be easily counter by fly with little effort. Unless the driver is a chiongster go accelerate fast, the fly sure do not have the energy to fly and keep up with the car acceleration and will smack into windscreen provided the acceleration is powerful enough and have distance to play with. This also applies to deceleration.

 

So sum up, it is acceleration and deceleration which move object. Once the object reach a constant speed, it is considered not moving in a sense ( i don't know the term). Just that because in earth there is air, so because of different speed ( not acceleration) you will feel the force ( actually not the force but the wind speed differential. I.e the wind need acceleration to get up to speed. Where in the car with window closed, the air already go through the acceleration and deceleration with the car.

 

I think that's should be the reason why the fly in the car no matter high speed or low speed will not smack into windscreen unless there is hard acceleration and deceleration.

 

I am not scientist hor, I just say what I think but answer maybe totally wrong. If wrong please correct me hor. Haha

Edited April 20, 2015 by Yewheng

[Camrysfa]

The car is moving at 100kmh,

The driver being seated inside is obviously also moving at this speed.

If a fly is outside the car and is keeping up with the car, then it should be also flying at 100.

If the fly is flying inside the car , no difference. In fact, it is easier as there is no strong wind inside the car.

[1fast1]

Scenario A: A car travelling at 100km/h constantly on an empty road with a fly flying in the car.

 

Is the fly keeping up with the car's speed? The fly would be travelling at the car's speed (100km/h) + whatever its flight speed is (e.g 3km/h)

 

No, but why?

If yes, really???!!

 

 

 

 

=====

 

I actually researched about the answers before but this question always lingered on my mind so I thought to share. Maybe my mind works in a different way, always wondering about weird stuffs. I am also interested in seeing some of the explanations here.

 

Thanks in advance

 

You have to define your frame of reference.

 

If you're taking things from the car frame, the car's speed is zero, while the fly's speed is 3km/h (or whatever).

 

If you're taking things from the road frame (the POV of a stationary observer at the roadside), the car's speed is 100km/h while the fly's is 103 if it's going toward the front of the car and 97 if it's going toward the rear.

 

It's meaningless to talk of speeds, velocities and even kinetic energy without first defining your (inertial) frame of reference.

 

The velocities in two inertial reference frames are rigidly related by transformations. The classical (Newtonian) transforms are just simple vector subtraction (which becomes scalar subtraction in a one-dimensional problem). This sort of "relativity" is known as Galilean relativity or Galilean invariance. This should not be confused with Einstein's relativity (or properly, the Special Theory of Relativity), which involves transformations that are more complex than simple vector subtraction (called Lorentz transforms).

 

For all intents and purposes in everyday life, the simple classical Galilean transforms work just fine. It's only when you are approaching the speed of light that you need to start using the Lorentz transforms.

[1fast1]

This one youtube has the answer. But is not the same as the fly.

 

I knew how the balloon was going to go before I watched it, but this is a nice illustration of how something can be counter-intuitive until you think about it a little.

 

"Common experience" dictates that "solid" objects tend to slip back when you accelerate and slip forward when you decelerate. Here the frame of reference is the car, and it should be noted that it is a non-inertial frame (as acceleration is involved). When you write down the equations in a non-inertial reference frame you get "inertial" or "fictitious" non-Newtonian forces entering the picture, but I digress. The simple interpretation is that from the POV of someone accelerating with the car, a heavy object that isn't anchored down by a restraint or friction seems to accelerate in the opposite direction to any acceleration of the car. However, when you consider the perspective of a true inertial observer (the stationary pedestrian on the roadside), you will see that it is the car that accelerates and the object simply continues to move at its previous velocity (which was the velocity of the car before it started accelerating). Frames of reference matter a great deal.

 

In any case, it's "common sense" that solid objects move backward when you give the car sudden throttle. So why is this not behaving the same way? The simple answer is buoyancy. When the car accelerates, from the POV of the car's (non-inertial) reference frame, the air inside is accelerated backward and this causes a pressure gradient with higher pressure in the rear, and lower in the front. The He filled balloon, of lower density than air, experiences a buoyant force in the air causing it to "float" forward toward lower pressure. Easy peasy.

 

A more sophisticated way of looking at it is to consider any acceleration as a proxy for gravity. This is also surprisingly intuitive when you think about the "common experience" of a Helium balloon released from the ground: gravity acts downward, but the balloon floats away upward (neglecting crosswinds). So it seems that a He balloon flies opposite the direction of gravity. Now translate that intuitive understanding to the car, and think of the car's sudden acceleration forward as giving a gravity that is directed to the rear of the car (causing solid objects, including your head, to be thrown backward). The balloon, true to its "principles", flies away from this "artificial gravity" and moves toward the front of the car.

 

In actual fact, these two explanations are basically the same since a pressure gradient cannot exist without a force of some kind. Atmospheric pressure exists because of gravity, and the pressure gradient in an accelerating car exists because of fictitious forces in the car frame.

 

BTW, this is the same reason that when you move a spirit level forward, the bubble inside moves forward also, and vice versa. Again, counter-intuitive unless you think about it, but basically the same explanation - the air bubble is embedded in a higher density fluid (whatever they use in a spirit level) so it behaves the same way as a He balloon in air. And spirit levels are easily accessible, so everyone can immediately try this at home if they're not convinced.

Edited April 21, 2015 by Turboflat4

[Maxoo]

Lol any one can use simple,short, sweet english only to explain... Faint..

[1fast1]

Lol any one can use simple,short, sweet english only to explain... Faint..

 

OK.

 

From roadside, leetle fly go fast fast just like car go fast fast.

 

From inside car, leetle fly go slow slow.

 

Happy?

[Rncw]

my logic is....

 

the fly would be dead once i successfully kill it cos car travelling at high speed...with the fly inside the car is very irritating

[Nissan833]

my logic is....

 

the fly would be dead once i successfully kill it cos car travelling at high speed...with the fly inside the car is very irritating

 

Same here.. they cannot survive beyond 1 minute in my car. Too bad they enter at their own risk

[Angcheek]

I have this logic. It is acceleration and deceleration that move the object. object will remain stable with constant speed.

 

So perhaps the fly inside the car starting need to counter the acceleration force, so when car move accelerate, the fly will try best to fly to counter the force if not it will smack to the windscreen. However due to that acceleration is spread in more then 10 seconds to get up to speed, the acceleration force is not a lot and can be easily counter by fly with little effort. Unless the driver is a chiongster go accelerate fast, the fly sure do not have the energy to fly and keep up with the car acceleration and will smack into windscreen provided the acceleration is powerful enough and have distance to play with. This also applies to deceleration.

 

So sum up, it is acceleration and deceleration which move object. Once the object reach a constant speed, it is considered not moving in a sense ( i don't know the term). Just that because in earth there is air, so because of different speed ( not acceleration) you will feel the force ( actually not the force but the wind speed differential. I.e the wind need acceleration to get up to speed. Where in the car with window closed, the air already go through the acceleration and deceleration with the car.

 

I think that's should be the reason why the fly in the car no matter high speed or low speed will not smack into windscreen unless there is hard acceleration and deceleration.

 

I am not scientist hor, I just say what I think but answer maybe totally wrong. If wrong please correct me hor. Haha

 

 

There is 1 thing wrong in your post ......... ITS TOO EARLY in the morning to think about this ....