Eventually, Early Wraps Around To Late

Has anyone actually graphed Health, Wealth, and Wisdom vs Sleep Schedule?  


For the most part, with the possible exception of wisdom, it seems like all of them are pretty quantifiable metrics that should be able to be plotted.  Somebody just needs to get on that.  


I agree.  We've all heard the old-timey phrase, "Early to bed and early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise."  Many of us have also heard the Equally Profound Corollary "Early to rise and early to bed makes a man healthy, but socially dead." 

I'll wait here for a second while you watch the rest of the Wheel of Morality video...

So, I thought about this and got to thinking that the phrase was made during a time when the hours of the day were a slightly more rigid concept than they are today. 


There are still 24 hours in a day, dummy.  


Yes, but the activities during those hours are much more fluid than they used to be.  The world has gotten much smaller in the internets age, and people collaborate and communicate all over the world on a much more routine basis than when this phrase was coined.  Incidentally, the phrase is attributed to Benjamin Franklin and his book "Early Rising: A Natural, Social, and Religious Duty."  With people across multiple time zones living and working together much more regularly than they did back in Franklin's time, this makes the concept of "early" very different for every individual. 

Not only are people using different definitions of "early" when it comes to sleep patterns, but people's natural sleep cycles vary significantly, and the traditional concept of 8 hours of sleep per night is just as ambiguous.  On top of that, people of different ages require different amounts of sleep depending on their developmental needs, so early and early may not be best for them, medically. 

So, if we normalize the amount of sleep each person gets, is there a true correlation between start and stop times of sleep with respect to traditionally-defined standards of "early" and the resultant health, wealth, and wisdom of the test subject?  I'm not aware of any such studies being done.  Get on that, science! 

It's Like An Ace In The Hole

Is there a band that can “Rock and Roll” and “Party” at the same time?  

That assumes the possibility that Rocking and Rolling is not mutually exclusive to partying.  Which seems like at least a reasonably valid assumption.  

So, not long ago, I heard a song playing on the radio.  I forget what it was called.  But, the important part here is that the band seemed to expressing a desire to "Rock and Roll" all night in addition to "Partying" every day.  It was unclear if they were ultimately successful in either of their endeavors, but let's talk about goal setting for a bit here.  

I'm okay with a rock band wanting to Rock and Roll.  That is more or less what they're for.  But why do they limit themselves to merely wanting to Rock and Roll at night, when apparently the parties happen during the day.  If their rocking and rolling does not help contribute to the party, then they're either at the wrong party, or their rocking and rolling can't be very good.  Ideally, I would think that they could combine their efforts to everyone's benefit.  Rock and Roll at a party, thereby increasing the level of the party for all involved.  

It's also easier on the band's sleep schedule.  

However, I do understand that pulling this off would require finding a rock-and-roll-conducive party that lasts all night.  Otherwise, you end up rocking and rolling until the party ends, and you have nothing to do the rest of the night while you want to be rocking and rolling.  Conversely, if you rock and roll at an all-night party, then you may not feel up for partying during the day when you ostensibly want to be partying.  It's a conundrum.  

It seems to me that the easiest solution is to find a rock and roll band who is okay with doing their rocking and rolling during traditional partying hours and not limiting themselves to doing so all night.  Sometimes the most obvious solutions really are the best.  You know how the old adage goes...Keep It Simple, Stupid. 

Free Popcorn With Purchase!

I sincerely doubt I will ever want to tweet about a self-storage warehouse

Well, maybe if you won one of them on that fake game show about buying abandoned storage units, you'd tweet about it.  

  

I suppose that's true.  But, failing that, I don't see anything all that tweet-worthy about self storage warehouses. 

So, self-storage warehouses are pretty boring.  They're a big ol' building with a bunch of lockers of various sizes inside.  You rent one out for some defined period of time, come in, stuff in a bunch of the crap you own but don't have room for in your current living arrangement, and...well...that's about it.  

I can see why there would be differences from one self-storage warehouse to another.  Some might be in better locations, have wider easier-access doors, better climate control, better lighting, improved security...you know...things like that.  Depending on your self-storage needs, these might lead you to pick one location over another, and that seems perfectly reasonable.  But why would you ever want to tweet about it?  

See, there are a number of self-storage warehouses in the Greater Jeremy Area, since people around here apparently like to store stuff.  I've never researched any of them, so I have no idea what amenities any of them offer over another to offer a valid comparison.  What I do know is that one of them has a programmable lighted sign out front which can be easily seen from the major road.  When I drove past it recently, the sign read "Deals You Can Tweet About."

False.  

Of course, I can't quite detail what kind of deal I could get on a self-storage locker in that particular warehouse (or any other, for that matter), but I can just about guarantee that I won't be tweeting about it.  I will, however, Blag about their stupid sign. 

They Made A Documentary Or Something

For Cubs fans, winning the world series would be the greatest thing since sliced bread   

Chicago is quite well known for their bread.  Though usually, it's at the bottom of a deep-dish pizza, but that's hardly worth mentioning.  

So I was made aware of something fascinating yesterday.  Baseball is still happening!  Here we are in this semi-mythical time where all of the major sports are apparently playing.  Hockey season started a couple weeks ago, the Football season is in full swing, Basketball starts up this week (I was made aware of that even more recently than the baseball thing), and Baseball begins its World Series this week.  I was surprised that baseball was still happening...I would have thought they would have sorted that out by now, but apparently they need a couple more weeks.  

Anyway, this year's World Series features the Cleveland Indians versus the Chicago Cubs.  That's not a joke.  

The Cleveland Indians (and why I've typed "Clevelant" both times so far, I will never know...thank you, Spellcheck) last won the World Series in 1948, which I found at least a little confusing, since I thought they had won in the 1989 season.  As it turns out, they merely won a divisional playoff tiebreaker game, and lost the American League Championship Series to Chicago.  Box scores and particularly statistics for star pitcher Ricky Vaughn are difficult to locate.  The Indians made it to the World Series the following year, again on the strength of Vaughn's right arm, but strangely again, no statistics for the following series are available.  Regardless, it is a fantastically long championship drought.   

But it pales in comparison to the Championship Drought of the Chicago Cubs.  

Highly Reliable Sources have informed me that the Chicago Cubs' current streak of championship-less seasons is the longest in all of North America's major professional sports.  The last time the Cubs lifted Lord Stanley's Cup, The Vince Lombardi Trophy, The Larry O'Brien Championship Trophy, The Commissioner's Trophy (Seriously...that's the name...awful) was in 1908, when precisely none of the current roster's grandparents were alive.  I mean...I'm guessing...but I'll bet a dollar that I'm right.  

Another thing that didn't exist in 1908...sliced bread.  

As we're well aware, sliced bread was invented in 1928, and it was the greatest thing since bread was wrapped.  So, quite literally, if the Chicago Cubs were to win the World Series this year it would be the greatest thing for Cubs fans since sliced bread.