[Jimbee (OP)]

Boy, this is my third theory tonight. But you know I have so many to share. And I haven't been on these boards for a while. Consider that.

Anyways, I have this theory of my own, that I have had for some time now. I call it "circasepian rhythms" (more on how I named it later).

IAE, my theory is based partly on the idea of circadian rhythms—but with a unique twist. A cultural twist, in fact.

It just seems to me, that there are some important innate human rhythms, that are not based on seasonal or already establish biological patterns, but ones that are unique to each culture. Somehow, it seems to me, your body detects these cultural rhythms, and then incorporates it into your body.

This is esp. true, I have found, with the weekly schedule and rhythm, in western culture. I know I have heard many people say, that although it is a weekend, it just doesn't "feel" like a weekend for some reason (typically a change in schedule).

That actually is where I got the name. I looked up "week" in my classical Latin dictionary. And the classical name, at least, was "septem dies". Septem Dies is rather long. So I just shortened it to "circasepian".

So what do you think about my biological theory? I look forward to your comments on this too .

[Bored chemist]

Boy, this is my third theory tonight

I doubt that
"A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that has been repeatedly tested and corroborated in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results."
From
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

Somehow, it seems to me, your body detects these cultural rhythms, and then incorporates it into your body.

What evidence do you have for that?

[Jimbee (OP)]

What evidence do you have for that?

Pure personal observation. Plus I tend to think I've always had a very rational and unbiased view of the world.

[Bored chemist]

Plus I tend to think I've always had a very rational and unbiased view of the world.

The first thing you posted here was wrong and biased.

this is my third theory tonight.

[Jimbee (OP)]

Plus I tend to think I've always had a very rational and unbiased view of the world.

The first thing you posted here was wrong and biased.

this is my third theory tonight.

Anyways, don't take this the wrong way. But as I said, I have been sharing this theory for about twenty years now. and I do have to say, yours is the first negative response I ever received to it. That's perfectly all right of course. But my point is, since the negative response only comes from you, the burden of explaining it does too. I will leave it at that, for now at least.

[Origin]

But as I said, I have been sharing this theory for about twenty years now. and I do have to say, yours is the first negative response I ever received to it.

Well, let's go ahead and make it two negative responses in 20 years.  You don't have a theory, you have an unevidenced opinion.

[Jimbee (OP)]

But as I said, I have been sharing this theory for about twenty years now. and I do have to say, yours is the first negative response I ever received to it.

Well, let's go ahead and make it two negative responses in 20 years.  You don't have a theory, you have an unevidenced opinion.

Science usually begins that way though ...

[Origin]

Science usually begins that way though  ...

I agree a theory might start out as a hunch.  However, a hunch is not a theory.  It is incorrect to call a hunch a theory

[Bored chemist]

But my point is, since the negative response only comes from you,

Are you aware of the "hundred authors against Einstein" story?

It only takes one person to prove that an idea is wrong.
Your have posted two ideas here.
One is about 7 day biological rhythms - which is a vaguely interesting idea, but essentially impossible to test.

The other idea that you have put forward is that your first idea is a theory.
And I'm the first person pointing out that you are wrong.
Origin is the 2nd person to point it out,.

the burden of explaining it does too

Nope.
It is your job to prove that your idea is good enough to count as a theory, rather than an hypothesis.
So far all we have is and unevinced claim.

Also, before your idea gets much further, you will have to tell us where you plan to get your control group.

[alancalverd]

Not entirely insane. If anything, more of a common observation than a new theory.

We know that women have an innate physiological cycle of 28 days plus or minus one or two. There are four distinct phases within that cycle, not all exactly the same length but ovulation pretty accurately occurs at  mid-cycle, so division of human bodily cycles into fortnights certainly has some physiological basis.

Why do some weekends not "feel like a weekend?" Because whilst we base our working week calendars and tide tables on the very precise lunar cycle of 28 days, the menstrual cycle is a bit wobbly and not necessarily synchronised to the phases of the moon.

And you should never forget who is in charge of your life.

[Bored chemist]

We know that women have an innate physiological cycle of 28 days plus or minus one or two.

Plus or minus about a week.

the menstrual cycle is a bit wobbly and not necessarily synchronised to the phases of the moon.

Not remotely synchronised.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23889481/

But, even if there was a link between the moon and people's behaviour,
(1) it would be almost impossible to rule out cultural, rather than biological causes.*
(2) it would explain a 28 day cycle, not a 7 day one.

* a cultural link is well established, e.g.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Society_of_Birmingham