Eleazar
May 8 2007, 02:00 PM
They have created a device that will allow you to get a full 8-hour sleep in just 3 hours.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,300...1264358,00.html
silentmaster101
May 8 2007, 02:02 PM
great, then they can extend the working hours for all us not of the upper class.
hobgoblin
May 8 2007, 03:01 PM
hmm, sounds like a power nap to me...
anyways, im all for it. my sleep pattern really needs regulating...
Uhh, i would so like that thing
I hope i will not cost 10.000 new yen... hehe
Moon-Hawk
May 8 2007, 04:49 PM
So if you could get all the sleep you need per 24-hour period in just 3 hours, how would you do it? Even though you've had a "full night's sleep" you probably can't stay up for the 21 hours until your next sleep cycle. Well, you could, but I typically get tired after being awake for 21 hours straight. Would you need to sleep 2 hours at night and then have a 1 hour super-siesta, to make it through your day?
Basically, here's what I'm wondering: Assume normal person sleeps for 8 hours and is awake for 16 out of a 24 hour cycle. If you suddenly convert your 8 hours into 3, are you still only good for 16 hours of awake time, or are you good for the full 24 hour cycle so you can function well for 21 hours?
I haven't read any studies about people with a reduced need for sleep to see whether that need to sleep comes back after a set time of being awake, or based on your natural 24 (technically more like 25) hour internal clock.
BlueRondo
May 9 2007, 11:16 AM
So is it possible to make some sort of sleep-wave transmitter that could, say, put someone (or many someones) to sleep from a distance?
pbangarth
May 9 2007, 02:47 PM
QUOTE (Moon-Hawk) |
So if you could get all the sleep you need per 24-hour period in just 3 hours, how would you do it? |
Me, I'd do two 3-hour stints under the machine a day and finally catch up on all those years of sleep debt, and still work and party at full speed!
Jrayjoker
May 9 2007, 03:34 PM
I recall reading about a woman who volunteered for an insomnia study because she only got 1-3 hours of sleep a night since she was a baby. She wasn't sleep deprived, and seldom took naps. The researchers originally didn't want to study her because she was suffering no ill effects, but basically learned that she went straight to REM and stayed there for the duration of her sleep cycle. When her brain was done recharging or recuperating or whatever she was good for more than 20 hours. If I recall correctly, she was in her 50s or 60s at the time of the study, and in perfect health.
So, no, you probably wouldn't need a nappy-poo.
Syonyde
May 9 2007, 05:45 PM
I would imagine that even with 3 hours of sleep, if you work construction or something, you'll still need more time to rest.
Kyoto Kid
May 9 2007, 05:59 PM
...agreed, it wouldn't do much for physical fatigue. However, I can see it being popular at finals time.
hobgoblin
May 9 2007, 07:37 PM
And you dont get the side effects of heavy speed use;) did anyone read that article on del.isi.us btw?
2bit
May 9 2007, 07:50 PM
QUOTE (Kyoto Kid) |
...agreed, it wouldn't do much for physical fatigue. |
that reminds me: for fatigue there's
the glove!But back to the topic, if you read the article it's not something that induces sleep. No sleepy raygun yet

According to this line:
QUOTE |
Slow wave activity occupies 80% of sleeping hours |
wouldn't it take about 6 hours to get the benefits of 8 hrs of sleep?
Rotbart van Dainig
May 9 2007, 08:05 PM
Sound like a device to degauss the brain.
Just the thing we need...
Catharz Godfoot
May 10 2007, 02:10 AM
A person needs about 4 hours of slow wave sleep to, as Rotbart van Dainig says, "degauss the brain."
Normally you go through cycles of REM sleep and slow wave sleep, until you've had about 4 hours of slow wave, after which it's basically just REM.
Your brain calibrates itself to the amount of sleep you normally get, making it so that the REM and slow wave cycles are balanced to give you ~4 hours of slow wave regardless of whether you sleep for 5, 6, 9, or 12 hours a day.
You can slowly work your way down by sleeping less each week. Volunteers studied have managed to work their way down to about 4-5 hours a night becore they can't take it anymore. When they stop trying to sleep less each week, they keep the reduction (permenantly) to some extent, usually sleeping 2 hours less than they did before the study.
Anyway, if you use this device you'll never dream.
nathanross
May 10 2007, 03:00 AM
As an automotive mechanic, getting up sucks, whether Ive had 2hrs sleep or 10. There is never enough. I would still probably sleep as much, though it would be great to have some guarantee that I got all the necissary sleep.
And sleep doesnt help body soreness, as your metabolism is lower than normal. Not sure how the inactivity helps recuperation, but sitting in front of the TV is about as good as that.
Rotbart van Dainig
May 10 2007, 08:12 AM
QUOTE (Catharz Godfoot) |
Anyway, if you use this device you'll never dream. |
That sounds too good to be true.
On the other hand, it might be that you still dream, just you dream will look like a CRT monitor after hitting the degauss button...
Moon-Hawk
May 10 2007, 04:42 PM
So, you're saying this thing might need a REM stimulation mode as well, so that it can let you dream? 'Cause I've always been told that bad things happen to your mind if you don't dream. (No actual evidence, mind you, but the idea does make me nervous.)
hobgoblin
May 10 2007, 05:05 PM
given the dreams i have been having lately, i would prefer not to dream while sleeping...
Catharz Godfoot
May 10 2007, 10:36 PM
QUOTE (Moon-Hawk) |
So, you're saying this thing might need a REM stimulation mode as well, so that it can let you dream? 'Cause I've always been told that bad things happen to your mind if you don't dream. (No actual evidence, mind you, but the idea does make me nervous.) |
Nah, you don't need the REM sleep at all, as far as anyone knows.
Starmage21
May 10 2007, 11:17 PM
QUOTE (Catharz Godfoot) |
QUOTE (Moon-Hawk @ May 10 2007, 11:42 AM) | So, you're saying this thing might need a REM stimulation mode as well, so that it can let you dream? 'Cause I've always been told that bad things happen to your mind if you don't dream. (No actual evidence, mind you, but the idea does make me nervous.) |
Nah, you don't need the REM sleep at all, as far as anyone knows.
|
Sleep studies have proven that its only during REM sleep that certain kinds of resting occur. If you never make it into REM(the patients in the test were awakened as soon as they made REM), you'll gradually begin to feel more and more fatigued. Like was stated before, if youre denied REM sleep, eventually your brain will jump into REM sooner to compensate.
Demon_Bob
May 11 2007, 03:20 PM
QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
And you dont get the side effects of heavy speed use;) did anyone read that article on del.isi.us btw? |
Side effects from the sleep device might be addition and insanity.
Rotbart van Dainig
May 11 2007, 03:31 PM
QUOTE (Demon_Bob) |
Side effects from the sleep device might be addition and insanity. |
Most people are addicted to sleep, anyway.
Now, the insanity part... well, we already live in interesting times.
Demon_Bob
May 11 2007, 03:56 PM
not additction to sleep but to the device, kinda like an addiction to sleeping pills.
hobgoblin
May 11 2007, 04:41 PM
QUOTE (Demon_Bob) |
not additction to sleep but to the device, kinda like an addiction to sleeping pills. |
well sleeping pills share chemicals with opium i think so its not 100% the same...
Moon-Hawk
May 11 2007, 04:46 PM
True, it's not necessarily going to be like sleeping pills, but I can imagine a situation where the brain sort of forgets how to fall asleep after using this device.
Of course, after a few days of being insomniac and kinda crazy I'm sure you'd fall asleep eventually, and probably get back onto a normal biological track soon enough.
Rotbart van Dainig
May 11 2007, 06:32 PM
You mean like the problem of staying awake without coffee?
Catharz Godfoot
May 13 2007, 06:33 AM
QUOTE (Starmage21) |
QUOTE (Catharz Godfoot @ May 10 2007, 05:36 PM) | QUOTE (Moon-Hawk @ May 10 2007, 11:42 AM) | So, you're saying this thing might need a REM stimulation mode as well, so that it can let you dream? 'Cause I've always been told that bad things happen to your mind if you don't dream. (No actual evidence, mind you, but the idea does make me nervous.) |
Nah, you don't need the REM sleep at all, as far as anyone knows.
|
Sleep studies have proven that its only during REM sleep that certain kinds of resting occur. If you never make it into REM(the patients in the test were awakened as soon as they made REM), you'll gradually begin to feel more and more fatigued. Like was stated before, if youre denied REM sleep, eventually your brain will jump into REM sooner to compensate.
|
Total elimination of REM sleep occurs with the use of some antipsychotics, and is a fairly effective
antidepressant.
Total elimination of slow wave sleep results in
death within a few days.
Not very good explanations, but they have some of the info:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...4&dopt=citationhttp://intl-ajpregu.physiology.org/cgi/con...act/265/5/R1148
Mr. Unpronounceable
May 14 2007, 06:02 PM
Not sure I'd buy that "death within a few days" thing - after all, there's an Italian bloodline with a genetic mutation that causes fatal insomnia, and that takes years to kill them.
G.NOME
May 15 2007, 11:21 AM
TMS is not considered totally harmless. You're saying you can seriously alter brain functions for positive purposes, but not for other purposes? Riiiight.
I wonder what would happen if you hooked it up to the Frontal Cortex. You could probably simulate drunkeness.
FYI, these aren't approved for CNS stimulation by the FDA. This is like a doctor prescribing cigarrettes for weight loss.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.