Curricula could also be improved. Students with a high software predictable likelihood of having unwell post-school life lifestyle could be encouraged to take electives correlated with better physiological well being. Besides subjects teaching style could have supported correlations with lifepsan and healthspan. So perhaps a class where people fill in workbooks during class time has the same correlation with physiological benefit as homework at those students who actually do their homework outside of school. The students the software predicts might face below median predicted lifetime wellness (perhaps their parents are unwell, or they have been suspended twice), could be encouraged to take an in-class workbook version of a class if the software predicted they might not do their homework.

Research on the education effect on lifetime physiological benefit could also see if it is possible to divide the benefit into measurable non scholastic researchable components like: “the feeling or sustained emotional flavor of the school experience; was school fun and interesting?”, measured self-esteem from perception of the social subjective value of their educational attainment (I saw a youtube video that said being known to have a college degree causes others to place the person in higher esteem); similarly those that do not complete high school, during the 20th century AD, might feel less spontaneous optimism about the things they can do if they feel like it, The effect of actual knowledge, or missed knowledge: treatment by others as well as perception of other’s esteem based on the social effects of how much knowledge they actually know or retain from school.

There could be many other non-scholastic components that are measurable and correlatable with the physiological benefits of education. Finding these creates the possibility of benefitting people’s physiological well being from activities different than scholastic activities, non-school based activities that are voluntary. Perhaps some meetup.com groups, coordinated delegation and activity participation at community volunteering, doing crafts, or independent reading could have workalike effects to the physiological benefits of education.

They could also research if certain styles of employment are predictive, and possibly controllable at experiments, of lifetime physiological benefit. Noting different people feel different ways, think different thoughts, and like different things, such a study seems likely to benefit from some kind of quantified cluster personality characterization measure like the big five personality test, with numbers treated as isolatable numeric clusters (extroversion numerically measured as 80-100, as well as extroversion 60-80 and others) as a way of quantifying personality when finding out the effects of various forms of employement on lifetime physiological benefit. A possible result of this research is actionable items and wellness and longevity career enabling and beginning certificates.

For the people that do things on purpose (likely high on big five conscientiousness), there might be a new or freshly advertised as awesome, career certificate attainable in less than a year, that create a career that confers a greater lifetime wellness and longevity benefit than even a college degree.

I read that people change careers with some predictability, so the employment certificate that correlates with more physiological benefit than some kind of median university degree, could be researched as to lifetime effects from just a typical duration at that career.

Using 300 hours learning and practicing at having fun has value.

Learning to have fun has tremendous value, and that people could benefit from experiencing advertising promoting being taught to have fun. It is possible the behavioral psychology of shaping young physiological children like kindergartners to practice and learn to have fun has lifetime value. I volunteer sharing and teaching reading at two elementary schools. One group is kindergarteners and the other is first graders; perhaps I could foster social styles, as well as mental activities like practicing to be fluent at creativity, like having them make up a new story from the images at the books.

Rent a friend, similar to talk therapy for the mentally well, So noting talk therapy is published as benefitting just 20% of the mentally unwell, then if, among the well, rent a friend talk, which might work for 20% of people among those it actually confers benefit on. I favor social companion robots that cause feelings and experienced well being at greater than the meaured 99th percentile of actual human friendships and romantic as well as sexual relationships.

Another way to describe a number, the kind of number economists might use, for the value of a 99th percentile at causing happiness companion robot, is to look at the correlation between money and measured happiness that occurs at those who gain money who previously had less than $70k each year. If going from 50k to 70k raises happiness 20%, then a companion robot that increases measured happiness 80% has the number $80,000 of equivalent-to-getting-more-money-value. Noting multi-year life of robot mechanisms and computers, it is possible the companion robot provides the happiness value of 800,000 to one million $ of actual money gained by the person. Notably it is possible the social companion robot that causes 80% greater happiness could make more than one person happy. If it makes 2 people, and 2 human physiological children 80% happier, then comparing it with the value of money at producing happiness, the equivalent money value of the social companion robot is $1.6 million or $2 million, with the equivalent money value to the human physiological children going unmeasured.

Note: I read that below $70k annual money amount a year, more money gain heightens measured happiness;
Among persons already above $70k at annual money gain, they did not gain greater happiness when gaining money above $70k at the United States. I think the $70k study was published near 2017 AD or 2016 AD.

People with quantitatively measured as different personalities (like different clusters of responses at the big five) may have different responses to gaining more money annually. It is possible to imagine some persons continue to increase their happiness up until $100K, while others may not experience greater happiness when they go above $50k.

The personality-sorted value of things that cause greater happiness can be used to adjust the value of a: thing or activity’s benefit to a particular actual person with a measurable personality.

The value of things, activities, rent-a-friend (Rent-a-friend: perhaps something like therapy, but for the mentally well), or social companion robots could be found for different personalities. Also with a personality measurement is seems possible to find out and have research on what big five personality clusters are most heightened as to their happiness with companion robots.

It is imaginable that a numeric measure of thrillingness that a person feels while having a romantic crush with some amount of actual interaction could predict the amount of happiness a social companion robot can produce, with a happiness causing romantic crush utilized as baseline,with the companion robot causing greater happpiness than a romantic crush. This is from me having a crush on the human Serina, we only talked some. Noting the heightened happiness from my feelings and the thrill of thinking about Serina, if it is possible to have a crush on a companion robot, with an actual 99th percentile of producing happiness from conversation, and other activities, possibly among them making out and sexual activity, This would raise happiness levels above those of having a felt as wonderful human romantic crush that is thrilling and happiness producing with fewer words of conversation, moments of companionship, and less physically-appearance-hypnotizing effects than a companion robot produces.

I support people, that is humans, being alive and being eternally youthful with death optional.

What is 99th percentile of beneficial at educational software? Noting there are thousands, or tens of thousands, or even higher numbers, of pieces of educational software 99th percentile could be hundreds of different programs Also at educational software how much statistical variance at educational software products, are they all pretty good (narrow distribution), or is there a wide distribution?

A mild, beneficial drug, possibly a nootropic could heighten moving vehicle, like car enjoyment, while producing the education effect on heightening wellness and healthspan or other from non-education wellness healthspan effects. As long as it was mild, and statistically minimally misused, it could be popular, This drug could also be studied as to its effectiviness at improving school scores and achievement as well as Increasing the longevity and wellness of mice, could support its use and parental perspective based on more safe than safe wellness longevity effects. It is possible that racetams, tyrosine, which might be nootropic and ispublished, atleast once, as anti-fatigue, could reduce vehicle accidents. The emphasis is on a beneficial drug that makes people more intelligent. The longevity drug and mild stimulant deprenyl might make drivingmore enjoybale and becorrelatedwith fewer accidents.

A nootropic with the education effect on longevity and healthspan that is an aphrodisic could be popular among teenagers, tweens and adults. Foxy (5MEO tryptophan or a similar chemical name) linked to a racetam molecule might do it.

The idea of a nootropic that heightens positive emotional amplitude is novel to me. People could feel more in love, yet also be more intelligent. I do not know what an actual human taking something like phenylpiracetam experiences if they are in love and hanging out with their loved one. Less? More? Different? Stimulating nootropics like caffeine enhance sociability which could make romance feel even nicer. So perhaps a stimulant nootropic that heightens positive emotional experience could have simultaneous benefit.