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: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 Internet Expert | Home: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Fax: +44 870 051 9937 Demon Internet | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646 THUS plc | |