What if average IQ was 200?

Quote: humy
But I just cannot wait until everybody's IQ is artificially increased to 1,000,000,000 or more.

Quote: http://www.livescience.com/17918-humans-intelligent.html
They have discovered that the brains of people with high IQs tend to be highly integrated, with neural paths connecting distant brain regions, while less intelligent people's brains build simpler, shorter routes.

Interesting Humy, but I don't think humanly possible.

I tried to imagine what such an I.Q. would be by imagining a scale of capability growing towards it. An I.Q. of 200 isn't too hard to imagine. Just picture an eight-year-old child with abilities like a sixteen year old. See him or her working at McDonald's and accurately handling money at the register. Taking his or her SATs and scoring 1500. This is a 200 I.Q. at age eight. The tricky part is imagining this eight-year old continuing to develop at the same rate until age sixteen. Imagining the sixteen-year old working on a theory of gravity.

Trying to extend the imaginary scale beyond 200, by halving the child's age, definitely fails before an I.Q. of 1600. Baby's working at McDonald's, seems meaningless and doesn't yield sixteen-year-olds and portable, black hole, power generators.

Then I thought of extending the development period, instead of halving the physical age, to increase the I.Q. scale and define its extreme. Would a human who continued to develop at the normal childhood rate beyond age sixteen to age thirty-two achieve a 200 I.Q. at age thirty-two? If so and 100 more points every sixteen years and then we'd only need 160 years of gentle growth to reach an I.Q. of 1000. 160,000,000 years of normal childhood like development and snap I.Q 1,000,000,000. 🙂

Let's go back to an I.Q. of 1000 because this led me right into the second quote and I don't want neural paths growing out of my ears. How many times can we loop around in there and not eat up needed working space? Maybe 200 is close to the limit of human biology? Nature is very good at using space and energy efficiently while maximizing return. We might need a major redesign to get past the naturally highest I.Q. Newton genes might help average Joe to Newton but how much more can they Newton, Newton? Major redesign won't get us there, maybe the next and new generation but not us.

So on to human plus technology. How fast could some future, more than computer, added to man develop? Growing would have be something more than just adding sixteen-year, human development cycle equivalent, expansion cards. Adding, learning, using, redesigning all concurrent and expanding out until the human part is just a vestige? Multiplied by machine speeds and eons in seconds and perhaps eons still and at 1,000,000,000 could there be anything more than a distant memory of man?

Originally posted by JerryH

Quote: humy
But I just cannot wait until everybody's IQ is artificially increased to 1,000,000,000 or more.

[quote]Quote: http://www.livescience.com/17918-humans-intelligent.html
They have discovered that the brains of people with high IQs tend to be highly integrated, with neural paths connecting distant brain regions, while l ...[text shortened]... rhaps eons still and at 1,000,000,000 could there be anything more than a distant memory of man?

I think if any improvement in general intelligence is to be had it may come from interated electronics with neurons. For instance, if electronic neurons can be made say around the size of carbon nanotubes, they would be both a lot more efficient energywise and a lot more dense than neurons. So there would be in this case a second set of neurons effectively but a lot faster so distant parts of the brain could be hooked together ALA human genius style. Clearly, just say, making the volume of heads larger with larger volume brains has some severe limits. Right now, the human brain already uses up 20% of the energy resources of the body. So if you simply double the number of neurons without increasing the individual neuron energy efficiency, you now have the brain taking up 40% of the available resources of the body. That seems to me to have a limit somewhere. Maybe you can add 20% more neurons and the associated cells and now the energy requirements are around 25% of the body's resources. Maybe that is possible, but double? sounds like an impossible demand on the resources of our all too human body.

But we may in the future, (100 years from now? 200?) be able to design artificial neurons based on something like carbon nanotubes to do the job of neurons but a lot more efficiently in terms of energy and they would likely be hundreds of times faster.

That leads one to the question, if that can happen, why would you need human neurons in the first place? Just make the whole brain out of the new stuff and get a thousand times as many 'neurons' in place in the same volume and maybe even less energy overall than a human brain and you have an artificial brain many times more intelligent than any human.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I hope all of you realize that I was quoting and Duchess64 was quoting my quote.
I don't know my IQ at all. Nor anyone else. And i don't care to know.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
I hope all of you realize that I was quoting and Duchess64 was quoting my quote.
I don't know my IQ at all. Nor anyone else. And i don't care to know.

Maybe you are afraid to know🙂

Originally posted by sonhouse
Maybe you are afraid to know🙂

Why would it be interesting to anyone, me myself included, how well I do when solving intelligence tests? I would be very interested to know my true intelligence. But as long noone has defined intelligence in a scientific way, then noone can measure my true intelligence, it's impossible. We simply don't know what intelligence is. Other than the ability to solve intelligence tests, of course.

Originally posted by sonhouse
http://www.livescience.com/17918-humans-intelligent.html

We would probably have better politicians.

Originally posted by whodey
We would probably have better politicians.

Well, they would figure more subtle ways to screw the populace.