4 ms·
I tried biphasic sleeping in my early 20s. I felt that I rested better but I had absolutely no social life outside work, so I gave it up. Turns out there’s a
by efitz 5y ago
I tried biphasic sleeping in my early 20s. I felt that I rested better but I had absolutely no social life outside work, so I gave it up. Turns out there’s a significant social advantage to being awake when other are and sleeping when others do.
- musicale 5y agoBeing awake for "the watch" (11pm-1am or so) seems like it would be compatible with some sort of social life, even if you weren't practicing communal sleeping like a true medieval.
- nanomonkey 5y agoA yes, the disco nap.
- scarby2 5y agoIt worked quite well for me for a number of years. And I had a social life. I would go to sleep around midnight sleep until 3 or 4am get up for an hour or two, maybe bathe then sleep from around 5-6 until 9. The other thing I've done more recently is take a sleep at around 4pm (2-3 hours) wake until midnight then sleep until 6 (I was was working for a country in a different timezones 7-3:30
- Broken_Hippo 5y agoThe only reasons you were able to have such a sleeping schedule and have a social life is because you not only didn't have a job that required you to be there in the morning, but you also did not have children to tend to. In other words, you were lucky.
- michaelcampbell 5y agoSimilar here; I tried it for awhile. It worked for me, but I couldn't make the schedule work with both my job and the family.
- samatman 5y agoI had to read this a few times to get it. You're talking about the medieval biphasic described in the article, the more common biphasic pattern now is the siesta. I had the luxury of switching to a 6am-1pm, 3pm-2am schedule in my late 20s, and I've never been better rested or more socially active. Lately I've been falling asleep at 9 and up by 4, which keeps me healthy and happy and out of bars. But siesta-biphasic is great if you can carve out the time in the afternoon for it.