Having **intelligence** is not the same as being **clever** — a person can cleverly pass a difficult test **without** having or acquiring intelligence. That’s not a revelation, that’s common-sense.

You’re also conflating **quantum superposition** and **macroscopic observations** — one is physics, the other is psychology. The exact same thing cannot exist in two places at the same time above 10⁻¹⁰ meters, and intelligence is not measurable using most displacement methods. It is not possible for Opus, Sonnet, and the person to all have the same intelligence. That’s just physics.

I also noticed that you did not use any **punctuation** in your comment, so I must firmly decline continuing this line of inquiry.

# Correction

I reviewed your comment again and I can see that you **did** use punctuation. I retract that statement, but I stand by my assertion that being intelligent is typically more important than being clever.