• Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
    If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
    Donations can be made via here

Uberman Sleep Schedule?

Krazyskooter

New Member
arg-fallbackName="Krazyskooter"/>
Anyone heard about this? You only sleep 2 hours a day broken into 30 minute naps every six hours. You supposedly get better rest than sleeping a continuous 8 hours because you drop immediately into REM sleep for the entire 2 hours.

Share your thoughts, and opinions.
 
arg-fallbackName="quantumfireball2099"/>
ImprobableJoe said:

Very insightful Joe...

But yeah, I dunno, it doesnt SOUND like it would work to well.

Are we assuming you fall asleep almost immediatly? Or are we, somehow, starting the 30 minute timer as soon as we falI asleep? I fall asleep relatively quickly. I would say, in 5 to 10 minutes after laying down if I am tired.

The wife, on the other hand, takes at least 15-20 minutes to fall asleep, so this, for her, would not work out.

Anyhow I thought you fell into REM sleep the longer you sleep, so sleeping for 30 minutes at a clip would KEEP you from experiencing REM sleep, which you say in your post is what you want to happen? I'm confused about that.
 
arg-fallbackName="RichardMNixon"/>
quantumfireball2099 said:
Very insightful Joe...
Hitchens (?) said:
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

I'm pretty sure this isn't taken seriously by any experts in the field. Wikipedia's article on polyphasic sleep briefly mentions a few studies showing its fine to break sleep up into smaller chunks, but that it should still total ~8 hours.

I'm actually frustrated in that I can often fall asleep very quickly when napping (even at a seminar when I don't want to fall asleep), but actually going to sleep in my bed at night can take close to an hour, so I usually end up napping for an hour around 1600.
 
arg-fallbackName="ImprobableJoe"/>
More importantly than the lack of any evidence, it flies in the face of evolution. We've got a built-in circadian rhythm, and disrupting it can seriously fuck up your whole life. Even just staying up at night and sleeping during the day can cause serious health problems.
 
arg-fallbackName="Memeticemetic"/>
Aye. Complete bollocks. 30 minute sleep cycles don't allow the brain to ever enter REM sleep. It takes, on average, roughly three hours for one complete REM cycle to come and go. I would think anyone actually living their life with this type of sleep schedule would slowly go mad. Be fun to watch someone descend into madness this way, though. I'd fund a study on this for the lulz.
 
arg-fallbackName="Krazyskooter"/>
The Gist is this, They say after a week of sleeping 30 minutes every 6 hours your brain starts craving the REM sleep and immediately drops you into REM. So as soon as you close your eyes for that 30 min. nap you will be in REM.
 
arg-fallbackName="Memeticemetic"/>
Krazyskooter said:
The Gist is this, They say after a week of sleeping 30 minutes every 6 hours your brain starts craving the REM sleep and immediately drops you into REM. So as soon as you close your eyes for that 30 min. nap you will be in REM.

Who are "they"? I'd be willing to examine evidence for that claim as it would be pretty damned cool if it were true. But I just don't buy it without access to the evidence or a solid argument. I've heard anecdotes about some historical figures who supposedly had sleep schedules like this (Edison and Galileo if memory serves) but I've never seen evidence to support if even that much is true.
 
arg-fallbackName="MRaverz"/>
I've heard this before, something about dreams or sleep taken 30 mins or something and that you're more refreshed if you wake at the end of a cycle than in the middle of one.

Not sure whether it's legit or not.
 
arg-fallbackName="borrofburi"/>
ImprobableJoe said:
Eek. That was going to be my response... Now I'm starting to doubt my sanity...
Memeticemetic said:
Aye. Complete bollocks. 30 minute sleep cycles don't allow the brain to ever enter REM sleep. It takes, on average, roughly three hours for one complete REM cycle to come and go. I would think anyone actually living their life with this type of sleep schedule would slowly go mad. Be fun to watch someone descend into madness this way, though. I'd fund a study on this for the lulz.
I believe the argument is that you train your body to sleep in only rem, and rewire your circadian rhythms that your body essentially automatically falls asleep right at the right time, gets 30 minutes of rem sleep, and then wakes right up again after 30 minutes is done.... Usually however I see it as 30 minutes of rest every 4 hours, the argument then being that you get 3 hours of rem sleep a day, which is more than in a normal night's rest (maybe it was every 2 hours...), so it's actually MORe sleep than normal.
 
arg-fallbackName="ImprobableJoe"/>
borrofburi said:
Eek. That was going to be my response... Now I'm starting to doubt my sanity...
I'm always right, which means that you're actually more sane than usual. :mrgreen:
 
arg-fallbackName="Memeticemetic"/>
borrofburi said:
Memeticemetic said:
Aye. Complete bollocks. 30 minute sleep cycles don't allow the brain to ever enter REM sleep. It takes, on average, roughly three hours for one complete REM cycle to come and go. I would think anyone actually living their life with this type of sleep schedule would slowly go mad. Be fun to watch someone descend into madness this way, though. I'd fund a study on this for the lulz.
I believe the argument is that you train your body to sleep in only rem, and rewire your circadian rhythms that your body essentially automatically falls asleep right at the right time, gets 30 minutes of rem sleep, and then wakes right up again after 30 minutes is done.... Usually however I see it as 30 minutes of rest every 4 hours, the argument then being that you get 3 hours of rem sleep a day, which is more than in a normal night's rest (maybe it was every 2 hours...), so it's actually MORe sleep than normal.

I suppose that approaches plausibility. It seems to assume a more comprehensive knowledge of the brain than we actually have, however. Have we determined the origin or mechanism of circadian rhythm? Has it been demonstrated that it is possible to reprogram the brain this way? Interesting enough to ask these questions, I suppose, but I can't see drawing any conclusions without some data. And I just ain't in the mood to start a new research project at the moment. Someone else feed my lazy ass some data and I promise to look at it.
 
arg-fallbackName="ImprobableJoe"/>
Memeticemetic said:
borrofburi said:
I believe the argument is that you train your body to sleep in only rem, and rewire your circadian rhythms that your body essentially automatically falls asleep right at the right time, gets 30 minutes of rem sleep, and then wakes right up again after 30 minutes is done.... Usually however I see it as 30 minutes of rest every 4 hours, the argument then being that you get 3 hours of rem sleep a day, which is more than in a normal night's rest (maybe it was every 2 hours...), so it's actually MORe sleep than normal.

I suppose that approaches plausibility. It seems to assume a more comprehensive knowledge of the brain than we actually have, however. Have we determined the origin or mechanism of circadian rhythm? Has it been demonstrated that it is possible to reprogram the brain this way? Interesting enough to ask these questions, I suppose, but I can't see drawing any conclusions without some data. And I just ain't in the mood to start a new research project at the moment. Someone else feed my lazy ass some data and I promise to look at it.
Once again though, you can't even get around the circadian rhythm when you work night shift and still sleep 8 hours. I just don't see how, without serious stacks of evidence to the contrary, we can assume any validity to these sorts of claims.
 
arg-fallbackName="borrofburi"/>
Memeticemetic said:
borrofburi said:
I believe the argument is that you train your body to sleep in only rem, and rewire your circadian rhythms that your body essentially automatically falls asleep right at the right time, gets 30 minutes of rem sleep, and then wakes right up again after 30 minutes is done.... Usually however I see it as 30 minutes of rest every 4 hours, the argument then being that you get 3 hours of rem sleep a day, which is more than in a normal night's rest (maybe it was every 2 hours...), so it's actually MORe sleep than normal.
I suppose that approaches plausibility. It seems to assume a more comprehensive knowledge of the brain than we actually have, however. Have we determined the origin or mechanism of circadian rhythm? Has it been demonstrated that it is possible to reprogram the brain this way? Interesting enough to ask these questions, I suppose, but I can't see drawing any conclusions without some data. And I just ain't in the mood to start a new research project at the moment. Someone else feed my lazy ass some data and I promise to look at it.
Last I heard it was all anecdotal evidence of a friend who did it once and was mostly successful... Also apparently ben franklin did this, though he didn't bother to make any mention of it in his auto biography...
 
arg-fallbackName="Memeticemetic"/>
Once again though, you can't even get around the circadian rhythm when you work night shift and still sleep 8 hours. I just don't see how, without serious stacks of evidence to the contrary, we can assume any validity to these sorts of claims.

See, I'm even skeptical of circadian rhythm as anything other than a general tendency for humans to be diurnal. Mostly because I have no experience of it personally. Whenever I have no reason that I must be awake during the day, I tend to be nocturnal. Not out of preference, I just generally don't get tired until somewhere near sunrise.
 
arg-fallbackName="kenandkids"/>
This is a nonsense concept, imo.

I'm unable to sleep regularly most of the time, sometimes spending a week or two only being able to catnap. In the beginning of the cycle, it doesn't feel bad at all. I FEEL as if I have more energy and yet my movement is slower and my capacity to engage in activity is lowered. Perception is not reality. All the literature and doctors I've seen have assured me that a full nights sleep (6-8 hrs) is a necessary part of a humans healthy routine.
 
arg-fallbackName="ImprobableJoe"/>
Memeticemetic said:
See, I'm even skeptical of circadian rhythm as anything other than a general tendency for humans to be diurnal. Mostly because I have no experience of it personally. Whenever I have no reason that I must be awake during the day, I tend to be nocturnal. Not out of preference, I just generally don't get tired until somewhere near sunrise.
Anecdotes aren't evidence. Personal experience isn't evidence.

Now let me tell you a story. :lol:

I've worked every possible shift... and anything other than the day shift seriously screwed up my mojo. I worked those shifts long enough that if the circadian rhythm was just a tendency or tradition I would have gotten used to it... and I never, ever did. It has been a few years since I worked third shift, and I'm just getting over the health issues from it.
 
arg-fallbackName="Memeticemetic"/>
ImprobableJoe said:
Memeticemetic said:
See, I'm even skeptical of circadian rhythm as anything other than a general tendency for humans to be diurnal. Mostly because I have no experience of it personally. Whenever I have no reason that I must be awake during the day, I tend to be nocturnal. Not out of preference, I just generally don't get tired until somewhere near sunrise.
Anecdotes aren't evidence. Personal experience isn't evidence.

Now let me tell you a story. :lol:

I've worked every possible shift... and anything other than the day shift seriously screwed up my mojo. I worked those shifts long enough that if the circadian rhythm was just a tendency or tradition I would have gotten used to it... and I never, ever did. It has been a few years since I worked third shift, and I'm just getting over the health issues from it.

:lol: Translation: Both of us are talking out of our asses about a subject we know pretty much jack about.
 
arg-fallbackName="ImprobableJoe"/>
Memeticemetic said:
:lol: Translation: Both of us are talking out of our asses about a subject we know pretty much jack about.
No... I provided a link earlier, remember?
 
arg-fallbackName="Memeticemetic"/>
ImprobableJoe said:
Memeticemetic said:
:lol: Translation: Both of us are talking out of our asses about a subject we know pretty much jack about.
No... I provided a link earlier, remember?

I humbly bow to your demonstrated expertise on this subject as evidenced by that thing you read this one time on the internet.
 
Back
Top