The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
I would encourage people if they want to try this to consider the 20 minutes per every 90 minutes of ultradian learning cycle, there you're incorporating a number of different neuroscience backed tools 90 minute cycles for focused learning.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
I would encourage people, if they want to try this to consider the 20 minutes per every 90 minutes of ultradian learning cycle, which brings us to the next thing about learning and plasticity, which is nootropics, a.k.a. smart drugs.
NSDR, Non-Sleep Deep Rest, as well as short 20 minute naps, which are very close to non-sleep deep rest because people rarely drop into deep states of sleep during short naps unless they're very sleep deprived-- NSDR has been shown to increase rates of learning when done for 20 minute bouts to match an approximately 90-minute bout of learning.
A study published in Cell Reports last year-- great journal. Excellent paper showing that 20-minute naps or light sleep of the non-sleep deep rest taken immediately after or close to it-- doesn't have to be immediately after you finish the last sentence of learning or whatever it is or bar of music. But a couple of minutes after transitioning to a period of non-sleep deep rest where you're turning off, the analysis of duration path and outcome has been shown to accelerate learning to a significant degree, both the amount of information and the retention of that information.