John Cowan said:
>> References for this? Your explanation makes a lot of sense and I'm
>> prepared to be convinced, but have been skeptical of experimental
>> design as applied to questions of human behavior since participating
>> in studies as a requirement of undergraduate psychology coursework.
>> And if this cycle is inferred from the behavior of undergraduates,
>> I'm even more skeptical :-)
>
> I think there's some confusion here between the 24.7h period of the
> diurnal mammal free-running clock and the 28h artificial cycles that
> Nathaniel Kleitman and his student B.H. Richardson tried to put themselves
> on over a 33-day period in Mammoth Cave back in 1938.
No, I think it's just that my memory has converted 24.7 into 27.
--
Clive D.W. Feather | Work: <clive_at_demon.net> | Tel: +44 20 8495 6138
Internet Expert | Home: <clive_at_davros.org> | Fax: +44 870 051 9937
Demon Internet | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646
THUS plc | |
Received on Thu Jun 08 2006 - 01:23:55 PDT