I've had many strange sleep schedules throughout the past few years and some enabling perspectives on what people call 'oversleeping.' I electronically stand here before you proclaiming, there is no such thing. What's that? A fan of Nietzsche? OVERSLEEPING IS DEAD.
A certain sci-fi book I read years ago gave me the foundational idea for the 'sleep experiment,' and a quick perusal of the interwebs does not reveal the title. Its jist was that aliens in a flying saucer came to earth during relatively primitive times compared to today. I cannot remember if the setting was a hundred years ago or a few hundred, but imagine pitchforks against aliens.... and the humans won! They took over the spaceship and flew back to the home planet, and won the battle there too [we're always to fight with aliens, it seems]. The rotation of their planet transpired in something substantially more than 24 hours, and the humans adapted to longer sleeping and waking periods.
During the almost-decade in which I ran competitively, it was apparent that consistent good amounts of sleep [and lack thereof] affected both the ability to rebound from hard workouts and performance in races. The ultimate proof came during college in which I was rebounding from a substantial injury and had no deep base of distance training from which to spring into harder workouts. While I had always focused on completing the coach's training plan entirely, I was now focused on on keeping a healthy circadian rhythm [and indulged in catching longer nights whenever possible]. In four months and with no base I was in the best shape of my life. In every event I ran I broke my pr [personal record/best].
The principle I tested was sleepHrs-to-awakeHrs proportions. 8hrs of sleep and 16hrs awake is considered a healthy proportion for a 24hr cycle, or 1:2. During that period of focus would often sleep 10-12 hours, which were the proportions 1:1.4 and 1:1, respectively. Lately, with getting back into running while biking a good amount each day, I've kept a 1.1:1.3 proportion typically, i.e. 11sleepHrs to 13awakeHrs. Springing from the sci-fi book's example, I decided to start an experiment with respect to the length of a sleepHrs-awakeHrs cycle and extend my cycle to 36 hours with one caveat: I only have the freedom to do this in the 72 hours beginning Fridays when I get up for work and ending Mondays when I wake up for work. I regret I cannot fully throw myself into this sleep strategy 36/(4 & 2/3). Alas! Work requirements stipulate otherwise.
Exercise will be a necessary part of this experiment. In order to sleep for such extended periods of time I will have to drain my body. The first two proposed 36hr cycles actually aligned quite well with the framework, this past weekend: 23½hrs awake, 12½hrs sleep [36hrs exactly, and not over-fraught with exercise so a typical sleepHrs-awakeHrs proportion, nigh 1:2], then 19½awakeHrs and 14½sleepHrs [only totalling 34 hours, but much closer to my aim for the 36hr cycle of a 1.1:1.3 proportion, or 19½-16½].
It is easy enough to talk quantities and theory of the experiment but I feel much safer about the qualitative side having gone through the first 72-turned-70hr period of testing it out. I was sleeping so often previously at the 1.1:1.3 ratio that staying up 23½hrs was tiring but easy compared to other times I've done it. Staying up for that long was only to try and instigate a longer period of sleeping to follow and hopefully I can more naturally assume a longer sleeping period in the future, as I continue the experiment on future weekends. I can say that today I felt physically great.
In the spirit of making language & definition your own, what do you think a 36hr cycle should be called? I am resisting the corny attempt to claim it a 'daay.' Something phonetically distinguishing would be probably be helpful.
Showing posts with label sleep cycle circadian rhythm oversleeping running. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sleep cycle circadian rhythm oversleeping running. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)