Thanks to all the members that have suggested it, we have set up a team on BOINC (Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Networked Computing). Have you ever wanted to help with cutting edge scientific research, or wanted to be a part of a team that is the first to discover something? Well now you can! We have launched an official Asgardia team on the BOINC servers which allows you to donate your unused computer processing power to science. Some of the amazing projects that you can help with are: Einstein@home which searches for pulsars and gravitational waves from the LIGO project SETI@home which searches for signs of Extraterrestrial Intelligence through analysing radio wave data Rosetta@home analyses protein structures and their passive folding habits to assist with disease research And many more! Just follow the instructions provided in the link to get yourself started! Launched by Dominic Sturt Thanks to all the members of the Asgardia community who helped this to become a reality. Special thanks to Nikari Steve Millar, and Ana Godinho for their contributions to the launch of the project

Thanks to all the members that have suggested it, we have set up a team on BOINC (Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Networked Computing). Have you ever wanted to help with cutting edge scientific research, or wanted to be a part of a team that is the first to discover something? Well now you can! We have launched an official Asgardia team on the BOINC servers which allows you to donate your unused computer processing power to science. Some of the amazing projects that you can help with are: Einstein@home which searches for pulsars and gravitational waves from the LIGO project SETI@home which searches for signs of Extraterrestrial Intelligence through analysing radio wave data Rosetta@home analyses protein structures and their passive folding habits to assist with disease research And many more! Just follow the instructions provided in the link to get yourself started! Launched by Dominic Sturt Thanks to all the members of the Asgardia community who helped this to become a reality. Special thanks to Nikari Steve Millar, and Ana Godinho for their contributions to the launch of the project

Disclaimer: I assume, in this, a few things. These are: 1) A healthy person will seek things that benefit them and if they benefit the group, so much the better. This key assumption underlies all existing understanding of cooperation, competition and conflict. It's very bad news if it's wrong, so we make it axiomatic and define all who don't nest it as unhealthy. It's a necessary fudge because true altruism is too rare to examine and define, whereas greed is the most common practice that is unhealthy to the group 2. The brain is the seat of all decisions, and the body and microbiome tune it chemically. There is nothing external that matters here. (Note to theists: There may be external factors, in whatever sense you like to believe. If you wish to believe in possession, I won't say you're wrong but I will say that this proposal has nothing to say about it.) 3. Criminals are therefore unhealthy but may be unhealthy for a number of reasons. However, this simplification ignores all of that. It all comes out in the wash. Here, then, is the method. Step 1: Neurological rehabilitation. a) The criminal is subject to very high-res MRI and fMRI scans, plus DNA check. The DNA check is mostly for the warrior gene, for identified medical responses, abnormal methylation and other tell-tale signs of something going wrong deep down in the biological level. The scans should help, as hyperactive or hypoactive regions might indicate problems. Behaviour-altering tumours and concussion damage can arise at any age, as well. This level tries to bring the brain's biochemistry under control, so that the brain gets to make real choices. In a fair number of cases, the issue won't be at this level. They'll be certified QAed and handed up a level. Step 2: Personal therapy. Therapy has an extremely low success rate, but I think that's because it's trying to build on broken foundations. Step 1 fixed those, so Step 2 should have a better chance of removing undesirable behaviours and turning the unremoveable ones into something more productive. Step 3: Job Therapy Find what work the person actually enjoys, turn it into something that pays, have the person carry out productive, meaningful work at full wages (that can't be spent yet), where the product is sold outside the prison and where the prisoner, work and "company" can continue afterwards if it turns out the person simply needs to live in a quasi-hermitage. So a prisoner can elect to extend their term as a half-way inpatient/outpatient arrangement. Note: Maths, art, poetry, composing symphonies - these are all valid work, provided that the results are publishable, receive sponsorship or recognition, or can sell. It doesn't have to be physical, it just has to fix your reputation and give you financial support. Those who exhibit criminal modes of thought go through the cycle again, on the assumption that something was missed. At all points, a prisoner is treated as a person. Their conditions would follow the Norway model, as would recreation time. During treatment, they're a person where, for want of a better phrase, a silicon chip inside their head has switched to overload. Finding it and fixing it doesn't mean the person's lesser, it just means there was a cheap part. The fish might've been on weight watchers and had the wrong fats for what was needed. Who know, who cares, as long as it's fixed enough to have a decent life? What about unintentional criminals who fell on their faces in life and survived through theft? They may well have PTSD, which this structure can lessen or fix. Same with any mental scars from their conduct. First the neurology is fixed, then the psychology, followed by removing instability and replacing it with a stable, non-exploitive career. On leaving, the probation officer is informed of the person's direction in life, assets earned and concerns noted. This idea probably needs fixing some, but the basis (foundations, structure, career) seems to be sound.

I am working on a theoretical education system that has the stated end-goals: 1) A person, on graduation, should be free to pursue their personally ideal career to the greatest depth they are capable of. 2) A person, on graduation, should have as wide a range of options as possible, with the ability to attain an acceptably great depth in each, should they change their minds for any reason. 3) A person should maintain freedom of choice by having direct access to such knowledge and skills that they never become obsolete and are never doomed to a road that will vanish. 4) A person, throughout life, should maintain as much of the aforementioned freedom as practical, people trapped in blind alleys should be extremely rare - instead, people should have the opportunity to be desired in some capacity for as long as possible, preferably for life. Thus, there is no static definition of freedom, but rather a dynamic definition that aims to grant approximate equitability over a working lifetime over all the skills that can be learned. Freedom, therefore, includes freedom of choice that does not destroy future freedoms to choose. The methodology is based loosely on Neo-Classical education (broad curriculum but deep), with enhanced streaming. My proposal is to have multiple classes at the same speed but with different offsets, and many streams. The idea is that if the classes are at the wrong pace for you, go up or down gears until you find the correct pace. If a particular topic is too easy or hard, you can do the same for that topic alone, switching gears so that you get the best out of what you are taught, with no gaps. This does mean that there can be no motion of a year, and therefore no value in end of year exams. You get there when you get there. Tests are via classwork. However, work isn't the beginning or the end. It's just part of what is needed. In terms of physical activity, free play is a form of learning and should be encouraged. Physical exercise has many direct and indirect beneficial effects on the brain, as well as helping reduce autoimmune diseases. In terms of food, Jamie Oliver is basically correct that you need quality food to build a quality brain and to be assured of quality health. I'd probably look at the Mediterranean Diet and the foods in the so-called Blue Zones to develop a basic list of useful things to know there, but would want specialists in the microbiome and food science (not the same as dietary science, it's a branch of biochemistry). The ideal should be to balance out the friendly bacteria to maximize benefits. Each of the thousands of identified bacteria do something specific that is good for you. If someone suffers asthma, you won't cure it by boosting the bacteria that help program the autoimmune system, but they stand a chance of being less penalized by it. Bacteria that help brain development obviously need boosting, unless there's valuable high risk of sickness at that time of year - in that case, you want all the body's bacteria set up to be protective. People struggle and may need moving subjects or speeds without showing symptoms. However it does leave identifiable patterns in the brain if you look for them. MRI scans are basically harmless, so the target would be to utilize this to detect potentially catastrophic effects. a) One option is to provide 9.4T Structural MRI scans every two years. This will reveal, very clearly, parts of the brain that aren't developing as expected or have even atrophied against expectation. Because damage is keyed to specific demands in specific courses, it becomes possible to work around. b) A second option is to use fMRI to detect hyperactive and hypoactive parts of the brain. Some hyperactivity in some areas is fine for a child, but much of this will indicate disruptions to the free flow of free learning that must dominate. This part is expensive. Very. It's what is wanted down the line. If the school theory functions well the rest of the time, with little profit scooped off, it should be possible to buy the scanners in a decent time. Until then, buying machine time at suitable scanners as part of a neurological research project the school has hired researchers to carry out are about the limit. That's not cheap, so far less testing can be done. Another long-term target is to start young. Phoneme libraries and perception of cadence start to be built by the foetus in the last trimester and the very low-level brain structures seem to be locked in place a couple of months after birth. To be not merely "fluent" but to actually have all of the very fine detail present in language, that is your window. To be a polyglot, you must also start early or there's bleeding of words between languages. A child must be exposed to two additional languages by the time they're 6 months, preferably earlier. I'd advise languages that are unrelated, again to help prevent bleed-over. Knowing two extra languages should protect mental health for an additional five years beyond that of a monoglot of the same age. It also seems to improve senses and sharpen awareness of the world. Attention span approximates the Poisson distribution. The correct method is to put the vital information around the peak point. If the lecture is interesting, the tail won't fall so sharply, which is why you want to make sure that most present find it fascinating. In the tail area, you want classwork because that requires less attention. Attention is a function of mental exhaustion, but is also a product of poor diet. You need relatively uniform energy and brain-building fats and proteins. Instead of one huge lunch, three smaller lunches (that a student can not be asked to miss) would seem sensible. Formula 1 drivers have special diets built to sustain energy evenly over two hours, these might want to be examined. So you have two hours of formal schooling, a break for formal or freeform play, elevenses or whatever, brief rest, two more hours of formal schooling, etc, until the optimal time is reached. This will vary with age. I call this style Neuro-Classical education, as all of the emphasis is on the brain and its structure, with relatively little on specific subjects. It is mostly assumed that providing an infrastructure where knowledge is craved will work out what it needs. According to calculations on current schooling limitations and subtracting wasted time (including preventable illness, school discipline issues, questionable focus, no incentive to do well, lack of support for students who need help, etc), the average student would - under the above scheme - enter a degree program or equivalent at age 15, with an entire class dedicated to those who will enter university aged 12. Those who other schools would institutionalize as incapable would enter university just fine at 18, with many graduating. One society, tuned to needs.

First let me apologise if this has been discussed before but can we have clarification of what this actually means? Some of us believe we will be sending people into space and thus talk of space stations, artificial gravity etc. Others take it as some form of remote operated drones will be sent into space for things such as mining, asteroid killers etc. Can we get a definitive answer as to our realistic goals regarding this? If the aim is not to send actual humans into space, but instead to send some form of digital versions of us (such as remotely operated drones) then would a lot of what is being discussed be pointless (for the time being at least)? "Asgardia's philosophical envelope is to ‘digitalise’ the Noosphere, creating a mirror of humanity in space but without Earthly division into states, religions and nations. In Asgardia we are all just Earthlings!" Thanks.

Hello everyone I would like to discuss the possibility of offering citizenship to those who participate in the colonisation of any celestial body. I was thinking that in order to assert the role of Asgardia and guarantee it's success in the global community we should press forward and have a discussion with any space agency interested in this area. plus, who would not like to see an "asgardian" flag in the surface of mars?

Should Asgardia create it's own Top Level Domain? Please suggest what it should be below. Tack.

I hope I don't have to say that for too long! Humans don't need borders, we are not designed to segregate ourselves, hate our brothers and sisters for no reason. We are all family and should move together peacefully, this project is fantastic, whether I'm alive to see it through does not matter, being a part of it at the very beginning does. I hope 2017 is a good year for all of you Asgardians! Tom

I'm a graduate of an MSc in Conflict Prevention and Sustainable Peace and have spent time in a small number of countries affected by violent conflict. In my opinion, a big cause of war is the willingness to engage in it. I propose that Asgardia commit to non-aggression with the nations of Earth. Any weaponry or defence systems we have, I believe should be directed to exclusively off-world threats; asteroids etc. I do not believe deterrents work in the way they are intended to. Asgardia's power should be diplomatic and soft, good and positive relationships with other nations can create the identity of a country other countries can trust globally. We can be arbiters of peace among the nations of humanity and in order to do that, I believe we as a nation need to commit to non-aggression with all other nations. I make this case not only in principle, but so that we avoid putting our own citizens in harms way. We can set an example and set a standard, it could be a critical opportunity to change the human narrative. Whereas for centuries, we have been telling stories of the utility of warfare, I believe as a nation of the future, we begin a discourse on the utility of peace. Very happy to hear your thoughts.

Now I'm not 100% on the science involved, this is a theory. The idea is using magnetic energy powered by the sun or eventually other stars to send objects (ships, cargo) etc. Through space on a magnetic rail like a sling shot, Magnets work perfectly in the vacuum of space and in the absence of a gravitational field. They don't depend on any "environment" or "medium". And the electromagnetic force is independent of gravity.