Born to do Math 153 - The Heart of Intelligence

In-Sight Publishing

Born to do Math 153 - The Heart of Intelligence

Scott Douglas Jacobsen & Rick Rosner

January 15, 2020

[Beginning of recorded material]

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What is - and I am kind of embarrassed as I don't think I have ever asked this to you directly - the heart of intelligence, ignoring tests and such?

Rosner: The first answer is, "How do you even know there is a heart of intelligence?" There is something in the realm of IQ testing and intelligence testing. There is a concept called g, which stands for "general intelligence." You could and people do debate whether g even exists.

We infer general intelligence from people's performances on specific tasks. There's no such thing as general intelligence tasks. Everything is a specific thing: the eloquence of speech, skill at math, social skills, all the little tasks measured by or tested by an IQ test like how fast you can circle all the stars on a sheet of paper where 1/5th of the symbols are stars. 

What is missing in this picture taking blocks and making shapes out of them? Taking all those tasks, we are supposed to get an idea of someone's general intelligence. You could argue there is no such thing as general intelligence because our brains are adapted for doing the things that we need to do in our specific environments in this specific world. 

That's a pretty extreme argument to make because of 2+2=4, regardless of which galaxy you live in. There should be some really basic forms of thought. You should be able to figure out some kind of criteria for general intelligence. 

Jacobsen: Ron Hoeflin has a theory on that. The Categories of Thought, his encyclopedia of philosophy. 

Rosner: Ron has spent more than 40 years cataloguing philosophies. I didn't know it was a catalogue of ways of thought. That's pretty interesting as it's thousands of pages long.

To get at what intelligence might be, one of the primary tasks of thought is to form associations, to define things in our experience by what characteristics they have, which is a form of linking. That we know a dog is a dog because we've defined in our heads what characteristics are associated with dogs, say versus cats.

Size, fur, shape of ears, I like to say the brain is an association engine.

Jacobsen: What do you mean by that?

Rosner: Intelligence, you could argue, is involved in the accuracy and profundity of the associations formed. Are you able to get to the heart of things or analyze what is going on and get to the/find the essentials? 

[End of recorded material]

Authors[1]

Rick Rosner

American Television Writer

RickRosner@Hotmail.Com

www.rickrosner.org

(Updated July 25, 2019)

*High range testing (HRT) should be taken with honest skepticism grounded in the limited empirical development of the field at present, even in spite of honest and sincere efforts. If a higher general intelligence score, then the greater the variability in, and margin of error in, the general intelligence scores because of the greater rarity in the population.*

According to some semi-reputable sources gathered in a listing here, Rick G. Rosner may have among America's, North America's, and the world’s highest measured IQs at or above 190 (S.D. 15)/196 (S.D. 16) based on several high range test performances created by Christopher Harding, Jason Betts, Paul Cooijmans, and Ronald Hoeflin. He earned 12 years of college credit in less than a year and graduated with the equivalent of 8 majors. He has received 8 Writers Guild Awards and Emmy nominations, and was titled 2013 North American Genius of the Year by The World Genius Directory with the main "Genius" listing here.

He has written for Remote Control, Crank Yankers, The Man Show, The Emmys, The Grammys, and Jimmy Kimmel Live!. He worked as a bouncer, a nude art model, a roller-skating waiter, and a stripper. In a television commercial, Domino’s Pizza named him the "World’s Smartest Man." The commercial was taken off the air after Subway sandwiches issued a cease-and-desist. He was named "Best Bouncer" in the Denver Area, Colorado, by Westwood Magazine.

Rosner spent much of the late Disco Era as an undercover high school student. In addition, he spent 25 years as a bar bouncer and American fake ID-catcher, and 25+ years as a stripper, and nearly 30 years as a writer for more than 2,500 hours of network television. Errol Morris featured Rosner in the interview series entitled First Person, where some of this history was covered by Morris. He came in second, or lost, on Jeopardy!, sued Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? over a flawed question and lost the lawsuit. He won one game and lost one game on Are You Smarter Than a Drunk Person? (He was drunk). Finally, he spent 37+ years working on a time-invariant variation of the Big Bang Theory.

Currently, Rosner sits tweeting in a bathrobe (winter) or a towel (summer). He lives in Los Angeles, California with his wife, dog, and goldfish. He and his wife have a daughter. You can send him money or questions at LanceVersusRick@Gmail.Com, or a direct message via Twitter, or find him on LinkedIn, or see him on YouTube.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Editor-in-Chief, In-Sight Publishing

Scott.D.Jacobsen@Gmail.Com

In-Sight Publishing

(Updated January 1, 2020)

Scott Douglas Jacobsen founded In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal and In-Sight Publishing. He authored/co-authored some e-books, free or low-cost. If you want to contact Scott: Scott.D.Jacobsen@Gmail.com.

Endnotes

[1] Four format points for the session article:

1. Bold text following “Scott Douglas Jacobsen:” or “Jacobsen:” is Scott Douglas Jacobsen & non-bold text following “Rick Rosner:” or “Rosner:” is Rick Rosner. 
2. Session article conducted, transcribed, edited, formatted, and published by Scott. 
3. Footnotes & in-text citations in the interview & references after the interview. 
4. This session article has been edited for clarity and readability. 

For further information on the formatting guidelines incorporated into this document, please see the following documents:

1. American Psychological Association. (2010). Citation Guide: APA. Retrieved from http://www.lib.sfu.ca/system/files/28281/APA6CitationGuideSFUv3.pdf. 
2. Humble, A. (n.d.). Guide to Transcribing. Retrieved from http://www.msvu.ca/site/media/msvu/Transcription%20Guide.pdf. 

License and Copyright

License

In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Based on a work at www.in-sightjournal.com and www.rickrosner.org.

Copyright

© Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rick Rosner, and In-Sight Publishing 2012-2020. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rick Rosner, and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Born to do Math 140 - Taking the Universe at Face Value (2)

In-Sight Publishing

Born to do Math 140 - Taking the Universe at Face Value (2)

Scott Douglas Jacobsen & Rick Rosner

October 15, 2019

[Beginning of recorded material]

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: The clumpings in different areas. Those amount to really dense interaction areas. There is something relevant and important about the associations there.

Rick Rosner: Yes, but we haven't made much headway, once you've seen an equation written so many times, once you hear or see it, you immediately pick up the symbols automatically. You've heard it or remember it, auditorially. One way that you don't experience it is doing the math, in a sense.

When putting things together, you see as one object that which is multiple objects. You just do the math. There may be another way in which it has been rehearsed in your head so many times. Even without going to the associational trouble of seeing it, or hearing it, in memory or sub-vocally.

When you say stuff within your head, you don't even really need to think of the final answer. Do you need to think of it? Is it that ingrained? I am beginning to think something is so deeply ingrained in your brain so many times that I am beginning to think that that is part of the landscape, the mental landscape, and so the spatial landscape too.

The information there feels more profound. It will be deceptive phrasing. It feels less specific and deeper. It is like an underlying worldview or set of worldviews expressed. That would constitute something more of a structural thing.

Some deeply rooted framework upon which more specific sensory information are at rest. We have specific memories. Then we have this underlying set of feelings about the world. One suspect or several suspects in discovering those inchoate feelings or attitudes about the world, about stuff in general.

One is that they are like every other specific piece of information because they are based on less information. There's no difference. That all information is the same, except for the degree to which you have the information.

The picture that you have no idea about will be vaguer than the one that you do have information about. Another way to look at it is that, maybe, another, deeper - I don't want to say, "Metaphysics," because it is a deceptive phrasing - underlying vague attitudes that might be a form of deeply held, deeply researched information that is rooted in the gravitational history. This kind of tacit information.

It is this tacit information that is this substratum - or the underlying structure or landscape - upon which the associational structure is built. Almost like a golf course or a pinball field, where - not exactly a pinball field or machine... I don't know.

It is not the best analogy because you have flat play areas and ramps. I am thinking of an undulating landscape. When you try to remember something, it is like rolling a ball across the landscape. Whatever declivity the ball falls into, that is the triggered memory.

Imagine a rolling landscape with ball holes.

Jacobsen: A really, really complicated billiard balls table.

Rosner: More like a golf course because when you roll a golf ball around it, and when the ball rolls into a divot, then that calls up a memory. The landscape is what helps determine where the ball goes, the hills and valleys.

That landscape is the shape of space. The landscape contains information. The expressed associations as in the ball goes in the divot. That triggers a file to be recalled and presented to awareness. You don't directly perceive the landscape, but the landscape helps determine what you do perceive.

This may be indirectly perceived because, when you're rolling a billion balls a day across the landscape, your picture of reality is shaped by the landscape.

Jacobsen: How do all these billions of individual interactions on this landscape, on this virtual golf course, called the universe, come together in terms of non-physical connections between the parts while all part of this weave connected in some manner?

Rosner: Yes, the universe perceives itself via exchanging particles. In other words, the tightness, the thereness, of particles in the universe; I believe there is an argument to be made under the rules of Quantum Mechanics with the lack of fuzziness of everything in the universe due to the universe continually perceiving itself.

It is this particle exchange that determines the universe. It is the Tarantino gunfight. All the particles moving and interacting helps to pin the particles down fairly tightly in space, and in time; it is the universe detecting itself.

Jacobsen: This is in an intimate way with close interactions and far distant interactions.

Rosner: And due to the history of the interactions, that formed the basis for this landscape. The whole idea of fields is to avoid some of the problems of action at a distance. You get a field via the interaction of particles that hit you, directly. You being a particle.

So, something happening 10 lightyears away. It doesn't influence you until particles from that deal take 10 years or more to travel across to you, and then influence you, directly. There's no action-a-distance, I think, in an old sense that what happens there, now, is perceived or felt here-now.

Instead, the idea of fields, I think, is that you perceive what happens elsewhere once particles from elsewhere or the net product of particles, for instance - as I believe gravitation is the product of other forces (e.g., electromagnetic force expressed via photons with unbalanced net forces among swarms of photons manifesting gravitational force), but, still, you don't feel the force until particles have had enough time to travel from there to here.

That's a more complicated way of saying, "There's no instantaneous action-at-a-distance." Everything is mediated by stuff travelling across space. I would guess that the shape of the landscape is or potentially has, or can be, part of the conscious experience. Even though, we may not perceive it directly.

I would also argue: if so, it can be mistaken for a soul. Although, it's not. I think when people talk about the soul.

Jacobsen: You mean most people here.

Rosner: I mean people who have been exposed to a fair amount of science and are talking about the soul more philosophically than the idea of the soul as defined by a particular religion.

Jacobsen: I interpret that as liberal theology and natural philosophy.

Rosner: People have a sense. You see this in movies. I do not know if people believe in it or want to believe in it. There's something about reincarnation. There was a movie from 40 or 45 years ago called Heaven Can Wait. You see this in movies.

There's a bunch of movies like this, like 20 or more, where somebody dies and goes to heave. But they are put through some heavenly bureaucracy.

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Rosner: They are sent back out as a baby. For that to work, there has to be some essence of the person that is the same that comes back in the movie.

Jacobsen: Is there any part of that that makes any sense, practically, to you?

Rosner: Not exactly, no, it doesn't make any sense practically. If you obliterate all the information in somebody's head, if all the information is disallowed, then there's nothing to be transferred to the baby. But people do have a sense that there is some essence that transfers some specific memories.

I don't think people have any time to even entertain this kind of nonsense anymore. But I am wondering if the tacit information that is the rolling landscape is perceived within consciousness indirectly and vaguely, as a set of underlying knowledge.

The more I talk about it; the more it sounds like garbage. There is information is in the shape of space and in the distribution of matter. I am wondering how, assuming that IC is right and that our moment-to-moment consciousness can be visualized or manifested in a physical universe and the universe looks like the universe that we live in, we perceive the shape of our information space. Is it rolling hills? If we perceive it, do we perceive it vaguely but deeply?

Something that is less based on specifics. I don't know. I entertain the possibility, not that it is a soul, but that the information perceived that way has this vagueness that can be mistaken for that bullshitty soul that is the crux of cheesy reincarnation movies.

[End of recorded material]

Authors[1]

Rick Rosner

American Television Writer

RickRosner@Hotmail.Com

www.rickrosner.org

(Updated July 25, 2019)

*High range testing (HRT) should be taken with honest skepticism grounded in the limited empirical development of the field at present, even in spite of honest and sincere efforts. If a higher general intelligence score, then the greater the variability in, and margin of error in, the general intelligence scores because of the greater rarity in the population.*

According to some semi-reputable sources gathered in a listing here, Rick G. Rosner may have among America's, North America's, and the world’s highest measured IQs at or above 190 (S.D. 15)/196 (S.D. 16) based on several high range test performances created by Christopher Harding, Jason Betts, Paul Cooijmans, and Ronald Hoeflin. He earned 12 years of college credit in less than a year and graduated with the equivalent of 8 majors. He has received 8 Writers Guild Awards and Emmy nominations, and was titled 2013 North American Genius of the Year by The World Genius Directory with the main "Genius" listing here.

He has written for Remote Control, Crank Yankers, The Man Show, The Emmys, The Grammys, and Jimmy Kimmel Live!. He worked as a bouncer, a nude art model, a roller-skating waiter, and a stripper. In a television commercial, Domino’s Pizza named him the "World’s Smartest Man." The commercial was taken off the air after Subway sandwiches issued a cease-and-desist. He was named "Best Bouncer" in the Denver Area, Colorado, by Westwood Magazine.

Rosner spent much of the late Disco Era as an undercover high school student. In addition, he spent 25 years as a bar bouncer and American fake ID-catcher, and 25+ years as a stripper, and nearly 30 years as a writer for more than 2,500 hours of network television. Errol Morris featured Rosner in the interview series entitled First Person, where some of this history was covered by Morris. He came in second, or lost, on Jeopardy!, sued Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? over a flawed question and lost the lawsuit. He won one game and lost one game on Are You Smarter Than a Drunk Person? (He was drunk). Finally, he spent 37+ years working on a time-invariant variation of the Big Bang Theory.

Currently, Rosner sits tweeting in a bathrobe (winter) or a towel (summer). He lives in Los Angeles, California with his wife, dog, and goldfish. He and his wife have a daughter. You can send him money or questions at LanceVersusRick@Gmail.Com, or a direct message via Twitter, or find him on LinkedIn, or see him on YouTube.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Editor-in-Chief, In-Sight Publishing

Scott.D.Jacobsen@Gmail.Com

In-Sight Publishing

(Updated September 28, 2016)

Scott Douglas Jacobsen founded In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal and In-Sight Publishing. He authored/co-authored some e-books, free or low-cost. If you want to contact Scott: Scott.D.Jacobsen@Gmail.com.

Endnotes

[1] Four format points for the session article:

1. Bold text following “Scott Douglas Jacobsen:” or “Jacobsen:” is Scott Douglas Jacobsen & non-bold text following “Rick Rosner:” or “Rosner:” is Rick Rosner. 
2. Session article conducted, transcribed, edited, formatted, and published by Scott. 
3. Footnotes & in-text citations in the interview & references after the interview. 
4. This session article has been edited for clarity and readability. 

For further information on the formatting guidelines incorporated into this document, please see the following documents:

1. American Psychological Association. (2010). Citation Guide: APA. Retrieved from http://www.lib.sfu.ca/system/files/28281/APA6CitationGuideSFUv3.pdf. 
2. Humble, A. (n.d.). Guide to Transcribing. Retrieved from http://www.msvu.ca/site/media/msvu/Transcription%20Guide.pdf. 

License and Copyright

License

In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Based on a work at www.in-sightjournal.com and www.rickrosner.org.

Copyright

© Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rick Rosner, and In-Sight Publishing 2012-2019. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rick Rosner, and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Born to do Math 139 - Taking the Universe at Face Value (1)

In-Sight Publishing

Born to do Math 139 - Taking the Universe at Face Value (1)

Scott Douglas Jacobsen & Rick Rosner

October 8, 2019

[Beginning of recorded material]


Scott Douglas Jacobsen: The universe at face value. Go!

Rick Rosner: So, I am working on this novel. One of the characters in the novel is working in the same direction that we're working. I thought about it a little. The last time we talked; we talked about the universe being an associative engine

It is just to say that your mind or brain is an associative engine.

Jacobsen: It is the old phrase everything is connected but some things are more connected than others. 

Rosner: Yes! Your brain exists to form connections and then to the best of its ability pull up relevant connections given your present mental circumstances. That is, that which is in your current conscious arena and unconscious arena. Your brain will pull up what it thinks what you think is relevant from its store of associations.

Jacobsen: The puller-upper is par of you, too.

Rosner: Everything is you, right. You could argue, maybe less so your unconscious. What you experience as "you" is your conscious, to some extent your subconscious.

Jacobsen: I would mean in terms of the complete makeup of the person as the psyche. 

Rosner: You are everything that comes out of your brain. If limited to what you're conscious of, there are many things that happen outside of your awareness. But that's a distinction that we can talk about at some point.

Anyway, your brain works to give you the information that you think that you need. It works by association.

Jacobsen: Is there a better term than association?

Rosner: I don't know. How else could it work?

Jacobsen: Relationally?

Rosner: Relationally, connectedness. But I mean in terms of a sophisticated information processing entity to work.

Jacobsen: Probabilistic network.

Rosner: Is the only alternative to either give you no information or just random information? It is almost tautological to say that your brain works via association, or either tautological or elementary.

Jacobsen: It makes sense too. Anything associational can be built via networks or can build a network.

Rosner: That's obvious. The game is to figure out how it does that, what the rules are. In thinking about that, we've decided that there's a lot of shared information in, if you consider the universe as an information processor, or being distributed to the universe via the energy lost due to long-distance particles due to the curvature of space, which that energy goes into space itself and makes things more precisely defined in space and, also, determines where things are in space or where they move because that lost energy is manifested in the form of gravitation.

In the lazy way that I half think about things, that's the way I decided information is shared on a universe-wide basis. It ignores the obvious other way that information is shared. Here's where taking the universe at face value kicks in; when photons are received, are detected, are seen, that's another huge way that information is shared.

That is, photons from hundreds of millions and billions of years away; we are perceiving the universe. It makes sense that the universe also perceives itself that way via photons and, also, tacitly via the loss of energy in space via the travelling of long-distance photons.

[End of recorded material]

Authors[1]

Rick Rosner

American Television Writer

RickRosner@Hotmail.Com

www.rickrosner.org

(Updated July 25, 2019)

*High range testing (HRT) should be taken with honest skepticism grounded in the limited empirical development of the field at present, even in spite of honest and sincere efforts. If a higher general intelligence score, then the greater the variability in, and margin of error in, the general intelligence scores because of the greater rarity in the population.*

According to some semi-reputable sources gathered in a listing here, Rick G. Rosner may have among America's, North America's, and the world’s highest measured IQs at or above 190 (S.D. 15)/196 (S.D. 16) based on several high range test performances created by Christopher Harding, Jason Betts, Paul Cooijmans, and Ronald Hoeflin. He earned 12 years of college credit in less than a year and graduated with the equivalent of 8 majors. He has received 8 Writers Guild Awards and Emmy nominations, and was titled 2013 North American Genius of the Year by The World Genius Directory with the main "Genius" listing here.

He has written for Remote Control, Crank Yankers, The Man Show, The Emmys, The Grammys, and Jimmy Kimmel Live!. He worked as a bouncer, a nude art model, a roller-skating waiter, and a stripper. In a television commercial, Domino’s Pizza named him the "World’s Smartest Man." The commercial was taken off the air after Subway sandwiches issued a cease-and-desist. He was named "Best Bouncer" in the Denver Area, Colorado, by Westwood Magazine.

Rosner spent much of the late Disco Era as an undercover high school student. In addition, he spent 25 years as a bar bouncer and American fake ID-catcher, and 25+ years as a stripper, and nearly 30 years as a writer for more than 2,500 hours of network television. Errol Morris featured Rosner in the interview series entitled First Person, where some of this history was covered by Morris. He came in second, or lost, on Jeopardy!, sued Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? over a flawed question and lost the lawsuit. He won one game and lost one game on Are You Smarter Than a Drunk Person? (He was drunk). Finally, he spent 37+ years working on a time-invariant variation of the Big Bang Theory.

Currently, Rosner sits tweeting in a bathrobe (winter) or a towel (summer). He lives in Los Angeles, California with his wife, dog, and goldfish. He and his wife have a daughter. You can send him money or questions at LanceVersusRick@Gmail.Com, or a direct message via Twitter, or find him on LinkedIn, or see him on YouTube.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Editor-in-Chief, In-Sight Publishing

Scott.D.Jacobsen@Gmail.Com

In-Sight Publishing

(Updated September 28, 2016)

Scott Douglas Jacobsen founded In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal and In-Sight Publishing. He authored/co-authored some e-books, free or low-cost. If you want to contact Scott: Scott.D.Jacobsen@Gmail.com.

Endnotes

[1] Four format points for the session article:

1. Bold text following “Scott Douglas Jacobsen:” or “Jacobsen:” is Scott Douglas Jacobsen & non-bold text following “Rick Rosner:” or “Rosner:” is Rick Rosner. 
2. Session article conducted, transcribed, edited, formatted, and published by Scott. 
3. Footnotes & in-text citations in the interview & references after the interview. 
4. This session article has been edited for clarity and readability. 

For further information on the formatting guidelines incorporated into this document, please see the following documents:

1. American Psychological Association. (2010). Citation Guide: APA. Retrieved from http://www.lib.sfu.ca/system/files/28281/APA6CitationGuideSFUv3.pdf. 
2. Humble, A. (n.d.). Guide to Transcribing. Retrieved from http://www.msvu.ca/site/media/msvu/Transcription%20Guide.pdf. 

License and Copyright

License

In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Based on a work at www.in-sightjournal.com and www.rickrosner.org.

Copyright

© Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rick Rosner, and In-Sight Publishing 2012-2019. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rick Rosner, and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Born to do Math 138 - Kinks in the Personality

In-Sight Publishing

Born to do Math 138 - Kinks in the Personality

Scott Douglas Jacobsen & Rick Rosner

October 1, 2019

[Beginning of recorded material]


Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What about personality and intelligence flaws in Newton?

Rick Rosner: Newton, according to most sources, was a prick - vindictive, arrogant, and kind of a shit. He lived for a long time. So, he could get revenge on people. He had a long time to work out his grudges. 

Did this mess with his physics? I don't think so. He did a lot of shit. He didn't revolutionize math alone via Calculus and physics via Universal Gravitation. He ran the Royal Mint. He spent decades to research the Bible looking for hidden messages.

Jacobsen: Did he find anything?

Rosner: I don't know.

Jacobsen: Do you think it's even possible or just a fruitless endeavour?

Rosner: No, it is a fruitless endeavour, because guys wrote the Bible. You could argue that they were inspired by the Word of God, but they did not include secret codes. It was translated from Aramaic or whatever to English and from Latin to English.

So, no, there's no pulling legit signals out of the frickin' Bible.

Jacobsen: So, it is a dumb endeavour.

Rosner: Well, so is most stuff, apparently, Newton didn't want or have sex with anybody. Maybe, that freed up time to do shit. He was kind of iconoclastic in terms of behaviour. He got up when he wanted to, laid in bed and thought when he wanted to. He was the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University.

He had that position. In that position, he had servants who would bring him hot milk, whatever he wanted. I don't know what his responsibilities were, but he, probably, did mostly whatever he wanted - maybe delivering one lecture a year.

There's no way he would have put up with teaching classes, which may have freed him up to get shit done. 

[End of recorded material]

Authors[1]

Rick Rosner

American Television Writer

RickRosner@Hotmail.Com

www.rickrosner.org

(Updated July 25, 2019)

*High range testing (HRT) should be taken with honest skepticism grounded in the limited empirical development of the field at present, even in spite of honest and sincere efforts. If a higher general intelligence score, then the greater the variability in, and margin of error in, the general intelligence scores because of the greater rarity in the population.*

According to some semi-reputable sources gathered in a listing here, Rick G. Rosner may have among America's, North America's, and the world’s highest measured IQs at or above 190 (S.D. 15)/196 (S.D. 16) based on several high range test performances created by Christopher Harding, Jason Betts, Paul Cooijmans, and Ronald Hoeflin. He earned 12 years of college credit in less than a year and graduated with the equivalent of 8 majors. He has received 8 Writers Guild Awards and Emmy nominations, and was titled 2013 North American Genius of the Year by The World Genius Directory with the main "Genius" listing here.

He has written for Remote Control, Crank Yankers, The Man Show, The Emmys, The Grammys, and Jimmy Kimmel Live!. He worked as a bouncer, a nude art model, a roller-skating waiter, and a stripper. In a television commercial, Domino’s Pizza named him the "World’s Smartest Man." The commercial was taken off the air after Subway sandwiches issued a cease-and-desist. He was named "Best Bouncer" in the Denver Area, Colorado, by Westwood Magazine.

Rosner spent much of the late Disco Era as an undercover high school student. In addition, he spent 25 years as a bar bouncer and American fake ID-catcher, and 25+ years as a stripper, and nearly 30 years as a writer for more than 2,500 hours of network television. Errol Morris featured Rosner in the interview series entitled First Person, where some of this history was covered by Morris. He came in second, or lost, on Jeopardy!, sued Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? over a flawed question and lost the lawsuit. He won one game and lost one game on Are You Smarter Than a Drunk Person? (He was drunk). Finally, he spent 37+ years working on a time-invariant variation of the Big Bang Theory.

Currently, Rosner sits tweeting in a bathrobe (winter) or a towel (summer). He lives in Los Angeles, California with his wife, dog, and goldfish. He and his wife have a daughter. You can send him money or questions at LanceVersusRick@Gmail.Com, or a direct message via Twitter, or find him on LinkedIn, or see him on YouTube.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Editor-in-Chief, In-Sight Publishing

Scott.D.Jacobsen@Gmail.Com

In-Sight Publishing

(Updated September 28, 2016)

Scott Douglas Jacobsen founded In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal and In-Sight Publishing. He authored/co-authored some e-books, free or low-cost. If you want to contact Scott: Scott.D.Jacobsen@Gmail.com.

Endnotes

[1] Four format points for the session article:

1. Bold text following “Scott Douglas Jacobsen:” or “Jacobsen:” is Scott Douglas Jacobsen & non-bold text following “Rick Rosner:” or “Rosner:” is Rick Rosner. 
2. Session article conducted, transcribed, edited, formatted, and published by Scott. 
3. Footnotes & in-text citations in the interview & references after the interview. 
4. This session article has been edited for clarity and readability. 

For further information on the formatting guidelines incorporated into this document, please see the following documents:

1. American Psychological Association. (2010). Citation Guide: APA. Retrieved from http://www.lib.sfu.ca/system/files/28281/APA6CitationGuideSFUv3.pdf. 
2. Humble, A. (n.d.). Guide to Transcribing. Retrieved from http://www.msvu.ca/site/media/msvu/Transcription%20Guide.pdf. 

License and Copyright

License

In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Based on a work at www.in-sightjournal.com and www.rickrosner.org.

Copyright

© Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rick Rosner, and In-Sight Publishing 2012-2019. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Rick Rosner, and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.