|
| quote: | Originally posted by MehGoat
Here's a question I like to think about :
If we measured our lives, instead of in years, but rather in waking-hours, would you like to have all of them compressed into one long 40-50 year continuous period of wakefulness, at the end of which you drop dead, or split it up as we have it now?
If you spread your waking-hours-lifetime over as many years as possible, you get to see more of the future; on the other hand, if you can stay up 24 hours a day for your (shortened) life, you could get so much more done relative to everyone else... finish college in a couple years while keeping a job, etc.
You know, I've tried polyphasic sleeping, where you try to limit yourself to 2 hours of sleep a day by taking a 20-minute nap every 4 hours, but it's really hard. B-2 pilots do it on really long missions, as do some round-the-world sailors who need to be awake for long stretches of time with only minimal time set aside for sleep, but it's pretty impractical for someone who's still in school... | Question for you: How could you be so sure that should one stay awake for more hours totally in their life, that they will definitely die that much earlier? Maybe they will not live as long as if they slept a more natural number of hours, but what if they live only 3 or 4 years less by staying awake as much as possible (read: around 22--23 hours a day or longer) compared to sleeping a normal 6--9-hour sleeping period? the difference in awake hours is still in their favour even if they pass away a year or two earlier (everything else equal)...
PS: Also, some people just don't need much sleep to get through a day comfortably. I can easily make it through a regular school/workday on 6--7 hours of sleep, as long as I sleep regularly and not screw my schedule up. I don't need over 8 hours of sleep usually. Others may not be able to get by at all on 6--7 and need more like 9--10.
|