The Physics Of Astrology?

[quantumcarl]

This thread is a result of discussions in the other Astrology threads in this area of the Physics Forums.

If anyone has any ideas or solid data that has to do with the physics of astrology... please feel free to share them here.

I have my own inklings about the subject which will come later on.

[Adam]

I have no solid data regarding this topic. However, I think it's very probably that the differing electromagnetic fields of the system, and changing gravitational forces due to planetary alignments and all that, have some effect on us. Lunacy is a well-studied phenomenon, for example. We humans can sense gravity (ie. we generally know which way is up). Solar flares may have some effects. Basically, we are not closed systems. We interact with the universe around us, probably in more ways than we have yet quanitified. Altitude, latitude, chemicals, and so forth at our location of gestation and birth affect us. I see no reason why other forces affecting the location of gestation and birth should not affect us.

Does this mean the people who have been practicing astrology for millennia have it correct at all? Not necessarily. But there may be some similarities between reality and the beliefs of some astrological traditions. Note that before humans knew anything about electrons and valences and such, people had settled on gold, silver, and copper (the noble metals) as coinage, for the obvious reason of durability (and within their ranks, and order or rarity was used). Thousands of years ago nobody knew why those metals were groovy for coins, but they knew that they were, due to simple observations such as the lack of corrosion. So there is historical precedent for people developing ideas based on simple observations which are later confirmed or quantified through empirical study.

Or it could all be crap. I don't know.

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by Adam
I have no solid data regarding this topic. However, I think it's very probably that the differing electromagnetic fields of the system, and changing gravitational forces due to planetary alignments and all that, have some effect on us. Lunacy is a well-studied phenomenon, for example. We humans can sense gravity (ie. we generally know which way is up).

Blood and everything inside of your body is pulled down by gravity, of course you feel which way is up. In space where nothing moves no matter which direction you are then you have no way of knowing which way is up, that's why every wall/floor is useable space in space stations, I believe?. You are also making a huge leap in saying that gravity has an effect on our personality, and such. The actual change in gravity would be so enormously small that it is inconcievable to think that it would effect us on such a large scale. If it in fact did effect us through gravity, we would all have the same personality, etc according to astrology.

Another interesting point...the actual positions of the sun and moon in certain constellations has changed since astrology began. But the predictions have, so for example a Taurus, as predicted at the beginning of astrology, could be a Cancer today. Either they took into account the movement of the bodies and the changing personalities of people over time (which they did not have the means to measure to this degree), or you can conclude it isn't accurate.

[LogicalAtheist]

OH MY GOD. WHO DARED TO SAY THERE IS PHYSICS INVOLVED WITH ASTROLOGY.

ASTROLOGY IS ONE PSEUDO-SCIENCE THAT CAN BE RUINED IN LESS THAN 5 SENTENCES. OH MY GOD WHO DARED TO SAY THIS. UH OH BLOCK LIST HERE I COME!

HOW CAN YOU CALL YOURSELF QUANTUMCARL AND SAY SUCH THINGS! YOU HAVE BROKEN RULES OF LOGIC AND PHYSICS!!!

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
OH MY GOD. WHO DARED TO SAY THERE IS PHYSICS INVOLVED WITH ASTROLOGY.

ASTROLOGY IS ONE PSEUDO-SCIENCE THAT CAN BE RUINED IN LESS THAN 5 SENTENCES. OH MY GOD WHO DARED TO SAY THIS. UH OH BLOCK LIST HERE I COME!

HOW CAN YOU CALL YOURSELF QUANTUMCARL AND SAY SUCH THINGS! YOU HAVE BROKEN RULES OF LOGIC AND PHYSICS!!!

Five sentences, NONSENSE!!

2. Do not superimpose mythology onto reality.

It only took one[:)]

[Adam]

Wow. Capital letters. I'm convinced. [6)]

[LogicalAtheist]

Seriously people. I know this is a mystic and pseudoscience section, but these forums are physics forums. Must people bring up such horribly incorrect concepts?

GREG - How is it you can allow this to happen with sleeping at night? Ugh!

Well, yes it only takes that one statement. But what I mean is, specifically astrology can be ruined in a very simple observation that NOT A SINGLE PERSON who "believes" in astrology has ever made. The most obvious one. I think it's an indicatory of the level in intelligence in someone who superimposes astrology into reality.

[Kerrie]

the theory behind astrology is the same force that moves us moves the cycles that affect our tendencies...

[LogicalAtheist]

Originally posted by Kerrie
the theory behind astrology is the same force that moves us moves the cycles that affect our tendencies...

And is thus completely false. Astrology is a myth of ancient times, like all myths.

One by one they will be removed from reality. One by one.

But's that's incorrect anyways Kerrir. The "force that moves us" is:

1. The earths magnetic field

2. The suns gravitational field

Neither of those move the contellations which, many thousands of years ago, were thought to affect anything at all.

It's just a case of the mind liking patterns. That's all. Nothing but that. It's the same problems that that Iacchus guy has. He sees any similairities and thinks there must be some entire pattern to it all.

[Adam]

And is thus completely false. Astrology is a myth of ancient times, like all myths.

As I pointed out earlier, some beliefs and practices from ancient times are confirmed by modern science.


But's that's incorrect anyways Kerrir. The "force that moves us" is:
1. The earths magnetic field
2. The suns gravitational field

Are you saying that the Sun's magnetic field affects us but Jupiter's can't? Or that we don't get any effects from Alpha Centauri's gravity?


Neither of those move the contellations which, many thousands of years ago, were thought to affect anything at all.

Actually they do. But it's a TINY amount of force exerted at such distance.


It's just a case of the mind liking patterns. That's all. Nothing but that. It's the same problems that that Iacchus guy has. He sees any similairities and thinks there must be some entire pattern to it all.
I believe it all started with simple observations of the heavens which DID tell people when to plant crops, when to stock up for Winter, and so on. Yes, it was linking patterns: patterns of celstial movements, and patterns of growth and temperature on the ground.

[LogicalAtheist]

Yeah yeah. You know what I meant. On any important level.

Furthermore - your statement that "many ancient __ have been confirmed by modern science". Sure, some strange things will have a basis in reality. But not myths, because its the nature of a myth.

Like I said - I have prerecorded in my head the simple explanation which ruins astrology so easily. So in this case, it's nothing but a myth. Actually, more like a pseudo-science I guess.

[Zero]

LogicalAtheist,
You may want to take it down a notch or three. We are admittedly dealing with pseudoscience, so you don't have to be quite so aggressive. I don't buy into the reasoning that Kerrie gives for the 'workings' of astrology, but, if you accept the idea that astrology works somehow, it leads into some interesting stretching of the mind. For instance, we've previously discussed how the day/night cycle is different during different times of the year, and how that may physically affect the development of personality. That sort of speculation is grounded in scientific fact, and is the sort of thing you should learn to think about as a skeptic.

[LogicalAtheist]

ZERO - Take it down a notch, sure.

However, astrology is based upon a simple claim which has long sinced been ruined. Astrology doesn't work "somehow". It just doesn't happen. One doesn't even need to use science OR logic to ruin astrology.

The mere fact that the creators of astrology didn't know certain properties of the stars, that we now know, disproves it right off the bat.

You're right this in pseudoscience, but the author (who is now on ignore) chose to involve science in pseudoscience when this particular pseudoscience has long sinced so easily been proven false. I think Astrology is probably the most easily disproven pseudoscience ever.

[Zero]

I still think you are missing my point. Just because an aspect of a hypothesis is wrong (stars control human destiny), it doesn't mean that other aspects cannot possibly be true (approximate date of birth can potentially influence personality).

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by Adam
As I pointed out earlier, some beliefs and practices from ancient times are confirmed by modern science.

Care to provide the proofs?


Are you saying that the Sun's magnetic field affects us but Jupiter's can't? Or that we don't get any effects from Alpha Centauri's gravity?

Magnetic field isn't the same as gravitational field. Indeed he is saying that Jupiter's is tiny compared to the sun. [alpha] Centauri's gravity has an effect, very near zero though, if you believe you can feel that and it affects you then you should try finding aliens by their brain waves[:P]


I believe it all started with simple observations of the heavens which DID tell people when to plant crops, when to stock up for Winter, and so on. Yes, it was linking patterns: patterns of cel[e]stial movements, and patterns of growth and temperature on the ground.

The movement of our planet's, sun, and moon are constantly revolving, this doesn't mean that they affect us. I'm not sure, but I observe more than twelve 'patterns' of behavior.


Howdy Zero, I was just wondering if

I still think you are missing my point. Just because an aspect of a hypothesis is wrong (stars control human destiny), it doesn't mean that other aspects cannot possibly be true (approximate date of birth can potentially influence personality).

is true, then wouldn't this theory/hypothesis/idea be disproved if it can't make predictions accurately at least a large percent of the time?

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by kyle_soule
Care to provide the proofs?




Magnetic field isn't the same as gravitational field. Indeed he is saying that Jupiter's is tiny compared to the sun. [alpha] Centauri's gravity has an effect, very near zero though, if you believe you can feel that and it affects you then you should try finding aliens by their brain waves[:P]




The movement of our planet's, sun, and moon are constantly revolving, this doesn't mean that they affect us. I'm not sure, but I observe more than twelve 'patterns' of behavior.


Howdy Zero, I was just wondering if



is true, then wouldn't this theory/hypothesis/idea be disproved if it can't make predictions accurately at least a large percent of the time?

Actually, to all the sceptics... this thread has a question mark associated with it... if you haven't noticed.

I am asking if anyone sees a physical component to the practise of astrology... as in a quantum effect or other effect on individual human traits.

The quantum effect I am talking about is the effect that a HUGE planet like Jupiter or the Andromeda galaxy would have on a tiny speck of endoskeletal blood and guts like me. In Quantum theory can't we dis-regard the relativity of distance for a moment and look at the forces and dynamics between various entities in a system? I can't believe people are calling Alpha Centari a "speck"... when we all know its monsterous. Get real!

I also think that anyone coming along to bash astrology might have at least read up on it so they know what their bashing!

Right now, sceptical comments from Kyle and (not so)Logical Atheist are more like redneck baseball bats whacking at an unknown in a sleeping bag.

"Give up your vows."
Jim Morrison

[Zero]

Originally posted by kyle_soule



is true, then wouldn't this theory/hypothesis/idea be disproved if it can't make predictions accurately at least a large percent of the time?

Well, I think ANY sort of personality profiling is pseudoscience at best, because there are too many other factors involved in the development of a human being. Even if the time of year you were born could affect your personality, too many environmental factors exist to skew it beyond testability.

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by Zero
Well, I think ANY sort of personality profiling is pseudoscience at best, because there are too many other factors involved in the development of a human being. Even if the time of year you were born could affect your personality, too many environmental factors exist to skew it beyond testability.

Yes, environmental influence... that's what astrology is all about. I'm not sure if you've heard this little saying... but... it goes... "as above, so below".

This speaks of the influence of the outer cosmos on the earth bound "cosmos". The attributes of the parents of a child are influencial on the development of that child. The attributes of that child's parents are determined by those parents environmental influences.... or those environmental influences impacting on the parents......... right on down the line to when we were sharks or planeria worms......... these environmental influences include the push created by forces throughout the immediate sphere of influence.... or.... "event horizon".

Why is it that enormous influences suchas Jupiter, Saturn, the Sun and other celestial bodies should not be included in the list of environmental influences on a developing personality?

When you put one's parent directly beside Jupiter.... who do you think has the most environmental influence here??? And which influence has been around the longest???

(In other words, Jupiter has been around long enough to influence all the genetic traits of the parents complete anscestoral line of DNA... right back to its start as a single celled organism.)

[LogicalAtheist]

Like I said, astrology is a falsity. ZERO, you're failing to see that astrology is a bundled system. If the primary claim of astrology is (and it is) ruined, the entire system fails. The other claims exist. But as I said before, think of the infinite amount of possible true and false claims that could be proposed. Without their primary claim, they're nothing.

As I said, the claim that position of celestial bodies affects personality is so easily disproven.

Thus, the idea that birthdate affects personality is ruined. Nothing is similiar at all between oct 21 2002 and oct 21 2003.

Those days are as different as any two at all. The only thing that is similiar is what we call them.

Now, I will bet someone is about to make the primary astrology claim. The claim which is so easily ruined. So, now that someone will do it, I'll explain why it's false.

I am saddened by how a particular group of people here wish not to accept new knowledge. I've already learned quite a bit here!

Go ahead, say it, then I'll explain how easily it's ruined.

[LogicalAtheist]

Quantum - You're missing the point of our comments. You're daring to relate the hardest science with the most worthless pseudo-science. Your question is invalid, and is trumped by the very idea that a pseudo-science which has already been disproven could then not possibly have anything to do with a science.

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by Zero
Well, I think ANY sort of personality profiling is pseudoscience at best, because there are too many other factors involved in the development of a human being. Even if the time of year you were born could affect your personality, too many environmental factors exist to skew it beyond testability.

quantumcarl, how can you argue when this is the truth (what Zero said)^^, there is no scientific basis for astrology because, as Zero said, it is beyond testability. It's not that we must progress enough to test it, it just isn't testable at any time, in any place, with any level of intelligence.

[LogicalAtheist]

Originally posted by kyle_soule
quantumcarl, how can you argue when this is the truth (what Zero said)^^, there is no scientific basis for astrology because, as Zero said, it is beyond testability. It's not that we must progress enough to test it, it just isn't testable at any time, in any place, with any level of intelligence.

ZERO has made an error. It is testable, and is indeed disproven so easily.

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
ZERO has made an error. It is testable, and is indeed disproven so easily.

I would argue the same thing for religion, but knowing how religion cannot be proven wrong because it is simply a belief system, I was simply appealing to quantumcarl on his own terms (much like you would approach a religious argument). If he is convinced it hasn't been proven false through experiment, then perhaps he would be convinced by other means.

[LogicalAtheist]

Quantum carl appears to be one who won't allow his emotionally attaches assumptions to be challenged by scientific fact.

Also, religion is completely testably false. So is astrology. But astrology is a system which was developed in reality, and meant to truly be a realistic claim. But it's now easily falsitifed.

Religion was never meant to be any claim. It was merely a given mytholgical story. The error occured when a given population of people committed the superimposition error.

Thus, once it becomes obvious the superimposition occurs, (which it is to logical people) we see it's just a myth.

Take out a piece of paper. and write down "______ exists". in the blank put a name, or a name with defining properties.

The phrase doesn't need to be proven right. It's obviously wrong because it was indeed a mtyholgical system. There is no claim it exists outside of the phrase it exists in.

That superimposition is just an error ones makes. It's so common.

You know how when people see their favorite actors in real life, they almost assume it's the character and not the actor? That's the superimposition error. It's something humans do.

Humans generally assume anything they percieve is reality. When it is not. A story for example, people always mix it with reality.

It doesn't need proof because it's not in our reality. In our reality we use science and logic to investigate claims.

However religious mythology isn't in our reality. It's in a completely defined and limited system of it's respective mythological story.


Originally posted by kyle_soule
I would argue the same thing for religion, but knowing how religion cannot be proven wrong because it is simply a belief system, I was simply appealing to quantumcarl on his own terms (much like you would approach a religious argument). If he is convinced it hasn't been proven false through experiment, then perhaps he would be convinced by other means.

[sir-pinski]

hmmm things seem to be getting a little heated here [;)].

The problem with ideas like astrology lies in the weatherman effect I think. Namely that people only remember the time when it works (or doesn't in the case of weather). The predictions are also quite vague so that they usually have some application to practically anyone. It can be very easy to convince yourself that there is something to this when in fact there isn't. As far as trying to tie physics into it - your not going to manage it. The effect of stars (such as Alpha Centurai) on us is probably so small that if you could translate it into some form of force then it would be smaller than the planck length. I think Richard Dawkins made a brilliant analogy that the surgeon who delivers you at birth has more gravitational effect on you than Jupiter does. BTW out of curiosity how would you calculate your astrological chart if you (as a human) were sitting on a colonised world on the other side of the galaxy? [6)]

[Kerrie]

first off, I would like to say that some people's tone in this topic is a little harsh, and they need to not get so defensive about astrology or other "mythical" theories, as it shows a deep streak for intolerance-the human trait that ultimately destroys one another...

as a practicing beginning astrologist:

ASTROLOGY IS NOT A SCIENCE

therefore, it most likely does not fit into the logic of physics...

astrology is a tool, and a language that has been misused by so many that now it will most likely never get a real chance to be fully understood on the objective level...my only proof that it does work are the many people (that i do not know on a personal level) have done natal charts for and have named specific tendencies they possess more so then others...

so, as long as there are people trying to prove it as a science, it will continue to have the reputation it has...for those who understand it's language will find the ability to understand people and their motives much better...

[sir-pinski]

Part of the problem I think comes with whether it does work. Science as a system of investigation would say that it is unlikely that there is an effect. Usually science deals with the interactions within the physical world and so astrology, (unless it is proposed as a supernatural effect) would fall into this category. So what it comes down to really is to what extent you believe science can investigate reality.

[BoulderHead]

So what it comes down to really is to what extent you believe science can investigate reality.I think you make a good point with that statement. I'd like to borrow it for later use in philosophy or religion, if that's ok, because this is a point that I see being argued quite often.

[LogicalAtheist]

Astrology is a system.

A system has a primary claim, followed by claims assuming the primary claim is true.

In the case of Astrology, the primary claim of Astrology is something that is so easily false. Thus the entire system of Astrology is completely false.

The individual claims, some of them, may have some truth. But because the primary claim is ruined, those individual claims are not correctly reffered to as Astrology. Just as my arm is not me. It's just an arm.

I find it kind of sad that people study the assumptionary claims of Astrology, and yet completely and totally overlook the obvious falsity of the primary claim.

Kerrie - Without being offending, how can you say you "study" Astrology when the entire primary claim from which it sits has been proven false for a few centuries now?

Why is it that one who is studying something, can possibly have overlooked the primary claim of a systen? Is that really studying?

[Kerrie]

astrology is a study of cycles of how the particular aspects of the planets in relation to the earth affect people on a psychological level when it comes to tendencies-both weak and strong...what people misunderstand frequently is that the free will of life is in direct control of the actions people will make...the natal chart is a blueprint of someone's tendencies, but ultimately as free humans who have the power to choose, our consciousness, is in direct control of our lives...

logicalatheist~you are again approaching astrology in the science form---do not hold scientific standards for it...to study something does not require science, just like studying a language...i study people in relation to their charts and this amount of knowledge has taken me 12 years to accumulate, a substantial amount of time in relation to what you think you know...so, in order for you to understand this objectively and not make a biased claim, you should study it objectively yourself, otherwise your claim of astrology being false is not an objective statement...

So what it comes down to really is to what extent you believe science can investigate reality

this is exactly correct...many people have the belief that science is absolute...it too is a means of understanding the physics of our world...

[sir-pinski]

Originally posted by BoulderHead
I think you make a good point with that statement. I'd like to borrow it for later use in philosophy or religion, if that's ok, because this is a point that I see being argued quite often.

Sure, go ahead.

I think a lot of people do seem to get confused about what science is and it seems to be so in this case (from both sides). Ultimately you have to assume something OR have a belief when talking about the external world (e.g. I'm assuming PF and you guys actually exist [6)] ).

I should probably point out though that out of most systems of investigation which have existed, science is the one which has had the most direct success i.e. tangible effects. Personally I regard this as a good indication of it's suitability for investigating physical reality. However if something does come along which science cannot penetrate then so be it, until then I think science is a process which can be used with confidence.

BTW does anyone have an answer to my earlier question about astrology from the other side of the galaxy? I'm not trying to disprove anything just interested in the answer.

[BoulderHead]

Originally posted by sir-pinski
Sure, go ahead.Thanks.

I think a lot of people do seem to get confused about what science is and it seems to be so in this case (from both sides). Ultimately you have to assume something OR have a belief when talking about the external world (e.g. I'm assuming PF and you guys actually exist [6)] ).I agree.

I should probably point out though that out of most systems of investigation which have existed, science is the one which has had the most direct success i.e. tangible effects. I strongly agree.

Personally I regard this as a good indication of it's suitability for investigating physical reality. However if something does come along which science cannot penetrate then so be it, until then I think science is a process which can be used with confidence. Again, I agree.

BTW does anyone have an answer to my earlier question about astrology from the other side of the galaxy? I'm not trying to disprove anything just interested in the answer. [/B] Yes, I would call Miss Cleo and have her tell me! [:D]

[quantumcarl]

Just a reminder:

This is a thread which explores the possiblity of a type of Physics being inherent in the workings of Astrology.

It may be that Astrology is not a science. It may be the remnants of a science and it may be the beginnings of a science.

If anyone can show the proof in favour of or against the theory that planetary and other celestial bodies have a measurable influence over human traits... then this is the place to present your data!

Thank you.

[LogicalAtheist]

Originally posted by quantumcarl
Just a reminder:

This is a thread which explores the possiblity of a type of Physics being inherent in the workings of Astrology.

It may be that Astrology is not a science. It may be the remnants of a science and it may be the beginnings of a science.

If anyone can show the proof in favour of or against the theory that planetary and other celestial bodies have a measurable influence over human traits... then this is the place to present your data!

Thank you.

As I already said, and why aren't you listening? Astrologys primary claim of the system has been disproven for a few centuries now.

You need to read that over, and discontinue making statements about astrology.

[BoulderHead]

Considering the pure physical level, the astrology is partly justified by the gravitational influence of the stars, particularly the Moon and the Sun. These ones indeed notably produce "tide effects" on the Earth, effects that have some repercussions on the terrestrial life beings, perhaps because of the water they contain: the Sun acts on the thyroid and on the pulmonary metabolisms; the Moon on the women menstruation and on the vegetables metabolism for example. But the gravitation is not at all enough sufficient, because inappropriate, to explain the more subtle sidereal influences such as the psychological ones. The real foundation of the astrology probably lies in occult or obscured following facts:

The individual, thanks to its subtle bodies (notably the "etheric", "astral" and mental ones) is a part of the etheric body of the humanity.
The humanity is a part of the etheric body of the planet.
The Earth is a part of the solar system etheric body.
The solar system is a part of the galaxy etheric body, and itself is a part of the etheric body of the universe.

Taken from; http://perso.wanadoo.fr/heracliongb/astronom.htm

[sir-pinski]

Originally posted by quantumcarl
This is a thread which explores the possiblity of a type of Physics being inherent in the workings of Astrology.

However part of the discussion includes whether the scientific method can be used to investigate astrology. If not then IMO the disccusion is mute.

Originally posted by quantumcarl
If anyone can show the proof in favour of or against the theory that planetary and other celestial bodies have a measurable influence over human traits... then this is the place to present your data!

This is a good list of skeptical examinations of astrology:

http://www.astrosociety.org/education/resources/pseudobib.html#1

[Kerrie]

Excellent Boulderhead! You have done it again! I suggest everyone read this link BH provided before arguing for or against astrology any further...by the way, I added this page to my favorites~

[Kerrie]

Originally posted by sir-pinski
However part of the discussion includes whether the scientific method can be used to investigate astrology. If not then IMO the disccusion is mute.



This is a good list of skeptical examinations of astrology:

http://www.astrosociety.org/education/resources/pseudobib.html#1

i read your link, and all it had to say was:

Perhaps the best known of these fields is the ancient idea that the position of the Sun, Moon, and planets against the backdrop of stars at the moment we are born somehow affects our subsequent personality, career, or love-life

this is completely false according to a professional astrologist's approach-also proof that bias is getting in the way of the sceptic who authored this site...you can't believe everything you read, but you can believe what you know for yourself to be true, that's why i
QUESTION EVERYTHING[:D]

[sir-pinski]

Originally posted by Kerrie
this is completely false according to a professional astrologist's approach-also proof that bias is getting in the way of the sceptic who authored this site...you can't believe everything you read, but you can believe what you know for yourself to be true, that's why i
QUESTION EVERYTHING[:D]

I did point out that this was a good list of skeptical examinations of astrology. I agree that there is a bias to the site but everybody has biases whether they like to admit it or not.

Oh and I'm still wondering about astrology from the other side of the galaxy?

[LogicalAtheist]

Like I said. No one here has yet to address the issue that Astrology is a system mounted on a primary claim which is false.

Thus, the subsequent claims cannot be refered to as Astrology, but are only indidivudal claims.

Thus Astrology, as I said 3 times, has been ruined for quite a few centuries. And yet people continue to operate here under the assumption that Astrology is in an agnostic position of proof.

[sir-pinski]

may I ask what this primary claim specifically is. Could you also give me references for the evidence you claim exists. I agree though that each claim that astrology makes has to stand up on it's own merit's.

[LogicalAtheist]

Yes. there is indeed only one claim that, if true, defines this system someone called Astrology.

The subsequent claims that assume this one are merely applications of this claim assuming it's true.

They certianly can me considered astrology if and only if the primary claim is indeed true.

However, the primary claim of astrology (weather astrologists like it or not) is easily disproven. It was disproven when someone realized about rotation and revolution of bodies.

Many astrologists will say it isn't the primary claim. However, they're wrong. In there little astrological world they may see a different primary claim, but remember astrology is a claim (must be true) that one person, and one person only put forth.

Any subsequent changes are not astrology in the sense of speaking of it analytically.

Sure in modern life it can be generalized, but if we're going to use logic and science here, we need to choose the claim that the claiment put forth as Astrology.

Particularly, we find that since science disproved astrology in it's creators sense, many have branches outwards, trying to escape the reaches of science so as to save this emotional idea.

However, currently science has always caught up to the pseudo-paths and continued to disprove all the claims.

So, here you will find someone attempting to say astrology is some given thing that is currently beyond the knowledge of science. However, the "real" astrology is far past us, being disproven a few centuries ago, very quickly after celestial bodies began to be of a heightened scientific interest.

Perhaps Galileo was one who knowingly disproved astrology. I am not sure who specifically.

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by BoulderHead
...the Moon on the women menstruation and on the vegetables metabolism for example.

Interesting you would point this out, I can use it *evil laugh*[:)]

I will assume the moon does indeed have an affect on menstruation, I say assume because honestly I don't know. Put a group of women in the same living quarters for a relatively short amount of time and you will notice their cycles synchronize, despite the moon! This is a good example, I think, of the reality of outside influences, such as the moon, having a minimal affect on people and their behaviour, or in this case menstrual cycle. This doesn't disprove astrology, it simply shows that it doesn't apply due to our social interactions as humans.

[Adam]

Originally posted by kyle_soule
Care to provide the proofs?

I already did: the bit about the noble metals.


Magnetic field isn't the same as gravitational field. Indeed he is saying that Jupiter's is tiny compared to the sun. [alpha] Centauri's gravity has an effect, very near zero though, if you believe you can feel that and it affects you then you should try finding aliens by their brain waves[:P]

The larger a mass, the more it is affected by the gravity of another large mass out there such as Alpha Centauri. Earth and our star are affacted. This gravitational influence, and those of all the other stars and other things out there, influence our course as we tumble through the galaxy. Such influences could drag us through a heavily populated area, increase our chances of collision, and wipe out the human race.

As for EM and gravity, I did not say they are the same thing.


The movement of our planet's, sun, and moon are constantly revolving, this doesn't mean that they affect us. I'm not sure, but I observe more than twelve 'patterns' of behavior.

Celestial movements DO affect us. Read up on Ultradian, Circadian, and Infradian cycles. Watch flowers. Watch birds. Listen to birds on the night of a full moon; often they are as loud and active as during the day.

[Adam]

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
Like I said. No one here has yet to address the issue that Astrology is a system mounted on a primary claim which is false.

This is incorrect. Astrology is based on such simple matters as crop rotations and seasonal changes. The earliest records of astrology were based on these real, functioning systems.

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by Adam
I already did: the bit about the noble metals.

My apoligise, I think, I don't want to go back and read it, I will just take your word for it[t)]

As for EM and gravity, I did not say they are the same thing.

Your response seemingly implied the comparing of the two. He described gravity and you responded with magnetism...

Celestial movements DO affect us. Read up on Ultradian, Circadian, and Infradian cycles. Watch flowers. Watch birds. Listen to birds on the night of a full moon; often they are as loud and active as during the day.

I'm not a flower, or a bird, I don't see how those apply to human behavior. As for the cycles, when it is dark I'm tired...the primary mechanism of event timing is sensory based. Most of the time these rhythmic behaviours are genetically predetermined.

Circadian, simply the rotation of the earth, this is sensory as we wouldn't know the rotation if we couldn't observe the night and day cycle.

I'm no expert on ultradian, circadion, or infradian, nor do I care to delve in deeply, but they appear to be mainly sensory based or genetically determined, not influenced primarily by astrology.

[Adam]

Originally posted by kyle_soule

I'm no expert on ultradian, circadion, or infradian, nor do I care to delve in deeply, but they appear to be mainly sensory based or genetically determined, not influenced primarily by astrology.
The point was that things affecting our senses and therefore our biological cycles DO involve celestial movements, such as our axial rotation and the position of the moon and more. I don't see any reasonable way to deny this.

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by Kerrie
astrology is a study of cycles of how the particular aspects of the planets in relation to the earth affect people on a psychological level when it comes to tendencies-both weak and strong...what people misunderstand frequently is that the free will of life is in direct control of the actions people will make...the natal chart is a blueprint of someone's tendencies, but ultimately as free humans who have the power to choose, our consciousness, is in direct control of our lives...

logicalatheist~you are again approaching astrology in the science form---do not hold scientific standards for it...to study something does not require science, just like studying a language...i study people in relation to their charts and this amount of knowledge has taken me 12 years to accumulate, a substantial amount of time in relation to what you think you know...so, in order for you to understand this objectively and not make a biased claim, you should study it objectively yourself, otherwise your claim of astrology being false is not an objective statement...

this is exactly correct...many people have the belief that science is absolute...it too is a means of understanding the physics of our world...

I forgot you studied, or were interested in (or something[t)]) astrology! You should post more in here, as you probably know more than all of us.

I do like your point, you cannot take astrology as a science and use scientific reasoning with it. I'm stuck here though, does this mean that you must not think of it as false because you would use reasoning, based on science, because this is the only way to disprove it? Without using science to debate its validity, how can you debate it at all? In language you are not making any claims or predictions, this is only for theories, and theories as this point to science.

Let me see if I understand you correctly, you say we should study astrology as it is, without thinking truth or false is in it, simply take it in? And then do we formulate a response, if so, on what bases?

WAIT! You mean study it like mythology? More like studying to study it, perhaps gain insight into their way of thinking, not necessarily taking it as factual? Basically study it in its own context on its own terms?

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by Adam
The point was that things affecting our senses and therefore our biological cycles DO involve celestial movements, such as our axial rotation and the position of the moon and more. I don't see any reasonable way to deny this.

Adam, this is what I'm trying to point out.

It seems obvious to me that the sheer size and force of our celestial environment... with all its components... would effect our method of existing... surviving and interacting.

I really have no claim to an understanding of astrology... other than what I've heard from practicing astrologers. What I've heard sounds as though there are specific times in ones bio rythm... including birth... that are duely affected by the motion and presence of the planets and other systems in the immediate vicinity.

What does not jive with my understanding of life or biological existance is the idea of "past lives" or "reincarnation". I do think these traditions which are associated with astrology are a reflection of an understanding of genetic progression within a blood-line... thus, revealing certain traits that have been handed down or up over the course of many milenia of generations.

[LogicalAtheist]

***CONCLUSION TO THIS ENTIRE THREAD***

Quantum made a mistake in using the word astrology, when he in fact meant to say astronomy, or perhaps cosmology.

You see, now he finally tells us! that he meant that weather or not celestial bodies have any affect on "us".

Well, that's as much astrology as it is football.

CONCLUSIVE CLAIM: All mass has gravitation towards all other mass. Thus, indeed the mass that is "us" has gravitation from and to all other masses, namely planets. If you were looking for some physics relations, I think I'd say that since most celestial bodies don't have much gravitational affect on us (because we're beyond the midpoint of their and Earths gravitational fields) there isn't much to say other than indeed the smallest amounts of gravitation on us certainly do affect things. But the overwhelming amount of gravitation from Earth really trumps the concept.

So you see, Quantuam, it was a mistake in wording that caused this entire thing! Amazing the chaos of a mistake, man.....

Good Day![g)]

[Alexander]

Neither selestial "motion", nor location of Moon, nor planets, nor conception date (nor bith date) affects anything but fantasy of poorly educated about nature people.

By the way, zodiac constellations (which astrologists so love to use), are out of alignment today (due to Earth axis precession) - no more in selestial equator.

But so what? There are people who WANT to buy a horoscope. What to do then? Demand creates supply. By the way, as everybody knows, we have a professional astrologist - right here, in PF. She is even PF mentor (Kerry). Ask her, she will make a wonderfull horoscope for anyone here, and at a very reasonable prics (also look at her webpage which she advertises on her profile page for selection of horoscopes and other pseudo science products and services). There are variety of horoscopes there - from quick "free" one to fancy luxury $59 (and up). All you have to do is to subscribe or to pay one lump sum (major credit cards accepted).

So, it is just all about money: if there is a demand, there always will be a supply.

Order your horoscope here today! Dont just discuss, but support mystics and pseudoscience! (By the way, do members of PF forum get 10% discount?)

[LogicalAtheist]

Response based on Alexander's post above.

He said: "Neither selestial "motion", nor location of Moon, nor planets, nor conception date (nor bith date) affects anything but fantasy of poorly educated about nature people."

My response: You said it. You said!

He said: "By the way, zodiac constellations (which astrologists so love to use), are out of alignment today (due to Earth axis precession) - no more in selestial equator."

My response: This is the basic idea of the proof that astrology is a falitiy. I never mentioned it because like he also states, people who want to believe in falsities do so because they're so emotionally attached to them. They won't listen to proof, it threatens their being.

But here it is anyways. When astrology was concepted, the point was that at certain times during the year (the path of the sun) a given set of stars (which were, before this, picked out as a "set" only because to some drunk guy they looked like shapes - an insight into how people try to find patterns in patternless views) were in the path of the sun (celestial equator) at a certain time during the year.

The conclusion - out of freakin' nowhere - was that this set of stars, because it was on the path at a certain time, caused people to be a certain behavioral type, when born.

Uknowingly to people then, and the claim that ruins this to all hell, was that they didn't know that those stars follow a cycle themselves of about 1,400 years I believe it is.

In other words, I'm a "Libra". But on my birthday LIBRA is nowhere to be seen in the sun's path, except at a small point in time in that 1,400 year pattern.

The easiest claim that could botch up this like a cocked up neurosurgeon, would be for "astrologers" (yes it's an insult to be one) to claim that, yes indeed a given star pattern affects people, but we need to adjust the symbols to follow the pattern, so libras might now be born in july, and the libra qualities would also need to move to july.

Still and idiotic claim, but let's face it, that moves it to VERY IDIOTIC, from previously being JAWDROPPINGLY IDIOTIC. Am I right> heh.


Anyhow. Here we see an insight into a few problems with human application

1. People see patterns when there are none. I could explain these in a long neurological sense, I'll keep it short for everyone to understand. Our brains literally hate seeing new material. Now, often we "like" to see something new, a new movie verse an old one, etc... but in situations where emotions are involve, fear, paranoia etc... new material hurts our brains.

Our brains must do alot more work to process new materal than known material, take more glucose.

Our brains then try to immediately see anything familiar in what we're seeing.

Thus we have people seeing "fish" and "weighing scales" in stars at random points. Strange yes, but it's not their fault, their brain did it.

Also, we see people looking for patterns in behavior. Again their brains like to find patterns.

It's like "getting a brain off" when it happens. When someone meets someone who is a particular symbol, and they find it out AFTER knowing them, and it makes sense, it deepens the belief that it's correct.

When someone meets someone, and laters gets their symbol and they DONT match - the person starts to try to see how it could match. They choose the idea that the similiarities MUST be there, because my brain loves the pattern so much I must prove to it the pattern is there.

See how deeply patterns are loved by brains?? It takes less work, less glucose. Brains love being lazy.

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
My response: This is the basic idea of the proof that astrology is a falitiy. I never mentioned it because like he also states, people who want to believe in falsities do so because they're so emotionally attached to them. They won't listen to proof, it threatens their being.

I did mention it, and it didn't matter, it was in my first post.

[LogicalAtheist]

Originally posted by kyle_soule
I did mention it, and it didn't matter, it was in my first post.

You are correct! You did. And I did not see it! And yet, the nonsense continues eh? It's amazing is it not? It's also sickening!

[Adam]

Originally posted by Alexander
Neither selestial "motion", nor location of Moon, nor planets, nor conception date (nor bith date) affects anything but fantasy of poorly educated about nature people.

This is where actual education comes in handy:
http://www.1upinfo.com/encyclopedia/B/biorhyth.html
http://www.nimh.nih.gov/publicat/bioclock.cfm
http://www.cbt.virginia.edu/tutorial/TUTORIALMAIN.html
http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/C/Circadian.html

[LogicalAtheist]

Adam - you missed his point because of the scattered nature of his comments.

Unless I am mistaken, he meant that it doesn't affect overall concepts of a person, like behavior etc...

I believe it was him (among others including myself) who indeed are aware that the gravity of such large masses does have a graviational affect on our atoms. And yes there are biological (the atom level is physical) factors which ultimately these affect.

I believe he meant the other options above.

Because of the flawed nature of the very origin of this post, it's outcome can't very well be of high quality.

This is why I have what I do in my signature, and the recent addition to my sig I will add now.

Please follow the guidelines, they're not something I made up.

[Kerrie]

Originally posted by kyle_soule
I forgot you studied, or were interested in (or something[t)]) astrology! You should post more in here, as you probably know more than all of us.


i am choosing not to reply to this thread anymore because it has gone to a bashing instead of an objective discussion of the subject...it's too bad because i think there are a few open minded people here interested in knowing more...

[Adam]

Facts:

People are affected by movements of celestial bodies.
People sense and interact with both gravity and electromagnetic radiation.
The earliest recorded uses of astrology involve real-world, useful, functioning practices, such as giving farmers ideas of when to harvest crops and such.
Practices from the past are sometimes found to have a basis in fact which science stumbles upon later, such as the reasons for people using gold, silver, and copper coins.
The position of our star has changed in relation to others over the millennia.


Fiction:

You will win the lottery today.

[LogicalAtheist]

Kerrie - I see know bashing going on here, except bashing pseudo-science. Furthermore, nothing can be learned from a pseudo-science, except that it is a pseudo-science, and has no basis in reality.

If you haven't read the many people who have posted the easy one sentence falsity of the primary claim that identifies astrology, and you're still interest in studying, what's to say?

If one doesn't heed to an undesputable fact, what's the purpose of being here?

Discussion can work, but not when one takes something that exists not in reality, and superimposes into reality.

I sense that you're a bit to emotionally involved in astrology to realize the claim made here perhaps 5 times by 5 people.

If one is only emotionally attached to the truth of a claim, one will never feel bad! [t)]

As for Kyle's statement that Kerrie knows more than us about astrology. Id' say that one who adheres to this pseudo-science by it's very choice knows not even enough to know the primary basis for it is false!

Beyond that point, and when proven false as has been done, astrology does indeed NOT exist. It is pseudo-reality.

Thus all secondary claims based on the assumption that primary claim is true, are individual claims, and are nolonger part of this falsified astrology.

It's all very simple peeps, it's nothing new, and nothing brash. It's the easiest pseudo-science to disprove ever!

So accept it's empirical proof, and feel good about it.

If one isn't truly embracing the truth, one will never know it!

Kerrie - I understand how you dislike how easy it is to disprove something you "believe" in, and something you are attached to. I understand how in your view, a one sentence statement which disproves secondary claims so populated they exist in every yellow pages, in every bookstore and every llibrary, could look like bashing. But it's not. It's logic and science disproving a pseudo-science. Please realize this, it's how one becomes more knowledgable about the REAL world.

[;)] [g)] [:D] [:)] [:))]

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by Kerrie
i am choosing not to reply to this thread anymore because it has gone to a bashing instead of an objective discussion of the subject...it's too bad because i think there are a few open minded people here interested in knowing more...

You are correct, I think Alexander crossed the line, I see why you aren't going to post anymore. It is a shame that so often discussions like this come down to personal insults. I don't know if anybody currently active in the discussion is in it to learn, there is no actual discussion because everybody keeps making claims independent of other statements, both sides using very little to no facts.

Furthermore, nothing can be learned from a pseudo-science, except that it is a pseudo-science, and has no basis in reality.

Plenty can be learned, just not in the factual sense. There is no science to learn in it, I agree with you, but there is a lot to learn about how the people think that created astrology.

Is it possible that astrology came from the worship of the sun, moon, and stars?

[quantumcarl]

We've lost one of the only people who knows something about Astrology (Kerrie) due to the egomaniacal bantering and posturing of a few posters.

Anyone who is not interested in pursuing a constructive exploration of this topic could please put me and this thread on their ignore list (as Logical Aethiest promised to do... obviously he is not a man of his word ). [s(]

[Artman]

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
...And is thus completely false. Astrology is a myth of ancient times, like all myths.



Incorrect statement based on partial information and lack of even a basic education on the subject.

Our human ancesters' survival depended on astrology.
Astrology was very important for knowing when and where to hunt, for the development of calendrics and essential to the success of early agriculture. Archaeological evidence shows that Neanderthal man camped next to salmon runs and yet did not eat the fish (no bones were found). Cro-magnon man did eat the fish and they may have used Astrology as a calender to tell them when to return to the salmon streams. Early cavemen knew not to hunt for deer the day after a full moon because the night of the full moon the deer could eat at night and then hide during the next day. The Maya and Egyptians created accurate calenders and based much of their achitecture on astronomical data developed from their astrological research.

Astrology was very much a science in its beginning. Astronomy began as a subscience of Astrology. Astronomers were merely astrologers apprentices.

What you are railing at is the way that our present society interprets this subject, which, if you had listened to kerry you would know, is not a full and correct interpretation.

Originally posted by Alexander
...By the way, as everybody knows, we have a professional astrologist - right here, in PF. She is even PF mentor (Kerry). Ask her, she will make a wonderfull horoscope for anyone here, and at a very reasonable prics (also look at her webpage which she advertises on her profile page for selection of horoscopes and other pseudo science products and services). There are variety of horoscopes there - from quick "free" one to fancy luxury $59 (and up). All you have to do is to subscribe or to pay one lump sum (major credit cards accepted).

Uncool. Just because you make money at a subject does not mean that is has no validity. It has no bearing on the subject whatsoever and adds nothing to the discussion. Alexander, you get paid to do Chemistry, don't you? Does that make it any less of a science?

quantumcarl, Interesting question. I doubt there is a physical link to the planets, however I wonder if there is a biological link between personality and the seasons of conception, pregnancy and birth? The effects of such things as the mother's emotional condition during the seasons of pregnancy (enduring a third trimester during a hot summer) etc.?

There is always something that can be learned from asking questions.

[LogicalAtheist]

Artman - No, you're wrong. What you describe is ASTRONOMY not ASTROLOGY. You need to scroll up to read the fundemantal claim of astrology. Because it's false, there's no way one could apply astrology to reality and get a correct answer. Scroll up and read it.

I see now why Kerrie isn't willing to listen to the scientific proof that astrology is false, because she makes money off of it! Well, I'll let it go, but I urged here before to exam it from a scientific POV, but likely this will not take place. No further comments...

Originally posted by Artman
Incorrect statement based on partial information and lack of even a basic education on the subject.

Our human ancesters' survival depended on astrology.
Astrology was very important for knowing when and where to hunt, for the development of calendrics and essential to the success of early agriculture. Archaeological evidence shows that Neanderthal man camped next to salmon runs and yet did not eat the fish (no bones were found). Cro-magnon man did eat the fish and they may have used Astrology as a calender to tell them when to return to the salmon streams. Early cavemen knew not to hunt for deer the day after a full moon because the night of the full moon the deer could eat at night and then hide during the next day. The Maya and Egyptians created accurate calenders and based much of their achitecture on astronomical data developed from their astrological research.

Astrology was very much a science in its beginning. Astronomy began as a subscience of Astrology. Astronomers were merely astrologers apprentices.

What you are railing at is the way that our present society interprets this subject, which, if you had listened to kerry you would know, is not a full and correct interpretation.



Uncool. Just because you make money at a subject does not mean that is has no validity. It has no bearing on the subject whatsoever and adds nothing to the discussion. Alexander, you get paid to do Chemistry, don't you? Does that make it any less of a science?

quantumcarl, Interesting question. I doubt there is a physical link to the planets, however I wonder if there is a biological link between personality and the seasons of conception, pregnancy and birth? The effects of such things as the mother's emotional condition during the seasons of pregnancy (enduring a third trimester during a hot summer) etc.?

There is always something that can be learned from asking questions.

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by Artman
Incorrect statement based on partial information and lack of even a basic education on the subject.

Our human ancesters' survival depended on astrology.
Astrology was very important for knowing when and where to hunt, for the development of calendrics and essential to the success of early agriculture. Archaeological evidence shows that Neanderthal man camped next to salmon runs and yet did not eat the fish (no bones were found). Cro-magnon man did eat the fish and they may have used Astrology as a calender to tell them when to return to the salmon streams. Early cavemen knew not to hunt for deer the day after a full moon because the night of the full moon the deer could eat at night and then hide during the next day. The Maya and Egyptians created accurate calenders and based much of their achitecture on astronomical data developed from their astrological research.

Astrology was very much a science in its beginning. Astronomy began as a subscience of Astrology. Astronomers were merely astrologers apprentices.

What you are railing at is the way that our present society interprets this subject, which, if you had listened to kerry you would know, is not a full and correct interpretation.



Uncool. Just because you make money at a subject does not mean that is has no validity. It has no bearing on the subject whatsoever and adds nothing to the discussion. Alexander, you get paid to do Chemistry, don't you? Does that make it any less of a science?

quantumcarl, Interesting question. I doubt there is a physical link to the planets, however I wonder if there is a biological link between personality and the seasons of conception, pregnancy and birth? The effects of such things as the mother's emotional condition during the seasons of pregnancy (enduring a third trimester during a hot summer) etc.?

There is always something that can be learned from asking questions.

Why do you doubt, Artman? What premise do you have that makes you doubt the validity of the claims of astrology that "heavenly bodies" have an effect on the alignment and arrangment of DNA... thusly affecting the glands and hormones of an individual?... and thusly the interaction and personality of same individual?

Guess what....... on this new forum I have invested in me the power to delete this thread!!!

So... I'm coming back here once more and if its looking like Dickweed and Blunderpuss are still effing with their frickin' egos all over it... I'm taking it out to the trash. OK? OK.

Cheers.

[Artman]

Originally posted by LogicalAtheist
Artman - No, you're wrong. What you describe is ASTRONOMY not ASTROLOGY.

The astrology that is a myth (and I am not disputing that it is also a myth) is after the Greeks got hold of it and personified it. Astrology was the mother science of astronomy, not the other way around.

What do you think about my other thought on the subject? Originally posted by me...I wonder if there is a biological link between personality and the seasons of conception, pregnancy and birth? The effects of such things as the mother's emotional condition during the seasons of pregnancy (enduring a third trimester during a hot summer) etc.?"

Just a thought. You know a lot more about biology than I do. Any possibility?

[LogicalAtheist]

Art - I think your second comment, the answer would, sure it has some affect, but it's unbelievably miniscule. Similiar to the fact that, because Earth for us has such a grav pull, the moons and suns pull isn't sucking us up. There are some major factors that just overrule it.

[kyle_soule]

Astrology is so deeply rooted in human's that it is virtually impossible to prove wrong, it, like religion, comes down to faith in the unknown. Indeed one can always find falsity's in systems of faith, but they wouldn't be faith if there are possible wrongs in it, these are simply said to be questionable points (to the believer) and obvious disproofs (to the skeptic).

The debate will rage, but nobody will ever be convinced.

Examples of how deeply astrology is rooted:

Monday - Moon day
Tuesday - Mars' day
Wednesday - Mercury's day
Thursday - Jupiter's day
Friday - Venus' day
Saturday - Saturn's day
Sunday - Sun day

It is common practice for large companies to have an astrologer and graphologist to aid in hiring, firing, etc. You will find this occult art of divination has been applied to many subjects like pets, children, babies, gambling, cooking, medicine, criminology, dating, marriage, biochemistry, meditation, sex, politics, economics, psychology, feminism, and the Bible (quoted from Dr. John Weldon), everywhere you look you can find astrology.

Many have mentioned an ignorance of the basic concepts of astrology, here is a short introductory, if anybody wants to read it:

Despite its popularity, astrology is confusing to the average person because of its complexity and many unfamiliar words.
The zodiac is an imaginary “belt” of sky comprising the 12 astrological signs that the ancients illustrated by mythological figures, both human and animal. In other words, the mythological “signs” of the zodiac are overlaid upon the actual clusters, or constellations, of stars. And importantly, the “signs” exist irrespective of the actual positions of the constellations to which they are said to refer.
The signs are the 12 “signs of the zodiac,” also known as “sun signs.” Everyone is said to be born under one of these 12 signs (Pisces the fish, Leo the lion, Gemini the twins, Taurus the bull, and so on). Astrologers often group the signs according to psychological aspects or types.
The houses are the 12 divisions of the zodiac that are said to correspond symbolically to every area of life. The houses are also imaginary, and the planets are said to travel through the houses, influencing each area of life as they do.
The horoscope is a “map” of the heavens for the time of birth, or for any time thereafter.
On the horoscope, or chart, an astrologer plots the positions of the planets, signs, and houses, and then from this “map,” after interpreting numerous complex rules, many of which vary greatly from one astrologer to another, the astrologer gives a “reading.”
Technically, delineation is the name given to an astrological “reading.” This is an interpretation resulting from the combination of two or more astrological principles. Analysis or synthesis is the “complete” interpretation of the whole chart.
There is also the concept of rulership. Astrologers believe that each planet “rules” a sign of the Zodiac. For example, Mercury rules, or influences, Gemini and Virgo; Venus is said to rule Taurus and Libra; Saturn Capricorn; Neptune Pisces; and so on. In addition, the signs and their ruling planets are related to certain houses.
Another important term is aspect, which refers to the angles between the planets as plotted on a horoscope chart. Certain angles are interpreted as “good” and other angles are “bad,” while still others are “neutral” and acquire their “goodness” or “badness” from other astrological indicators. For example, two planets angled at 90 degrees to each other (called a “square”) is considered a bad influence. However, two planets angled at 120 degrees to each other (called a “trine”) is considered a good influence.
In addition to “good” or “bad” angles, astrological delineations must also take into consideration whether or not the planets are “good” or “bad.” Saturn and Mars, for example, are considered “bad”; Venus and Jupiter, “good.” But what is the basis for these angles and planets being defined as “good” or “bad”? The astrologers don’t know; they simply accept these definitions as they have been handed down. Some astrologers say that these definitions result from thousands of years of observing human experience. Others no longer use the “good” or “bad” designations. They have substituted milder descriptions, such as “externalization” and “internalization,” “active” and “passive,” “hard” and “soft”’ “difficult” and “easy.” Still, there is no one final, authoritative tradition that has come down through history that all astrologers follow. This is why there are many conflicting astrological theories. Transits are another essential concept. By determining when a planet crosses, or transits, a specific point on the horoscope chart, the astrologer feels he can advise a client as to “favorable” or “unfavorable” conditions. Just as there are good and bad planets and angles, there are good and bad times for undertaking activities. This was why Hitler planned his war strategy by the stars and why other world leaders throughout history have leaned on advice of the stars.
It is evident from all of this that astrological interpretations are not only complicated but highly subjective. How does the astrologer know that Venus or a trine is good, that Mars or a square is bad? How does he know that the first house represents personality, the second house money, the third house communication, the eighth house death, the tenth house occupation? On what factual basis do astrologers make their assertions?
Some astrologers claim their definitions are derived from numerology, from the meanings allegedly inherent in numbers, which are then related to astrological theory. But if so, where is a factual basis for the numerological meanings? Why don’t all astrologers agree on this? There is also disagreement concerning how to divide the 12 houses. A given house for one astrologer may be a different house for another; therefore, entirely different influences would be suggested. Astrological interpretations also rest on other questionable foundations. An astrologer can choose from up to 30 different zodiacs, 28 different signs, and ten different house systems. Even after wading through all this, the astrologer’s headache has still not ended. He must choose whether to use the concepts of nodes, triplicities, and quadruplicities. The moon’s nodes relate to the intersection of the moon’s orbit with the apparent path of the sun among the stars (the ecliptic). These supposed “intersections” are said to exert certain influences. And there are also the influences from the nodes of the planets, the points at which the orbits of the planets intersect the ecliptic. Triplicities refer to how the four astrological elements of fire, earth, air, and water each relate to three signs. For example, Libra, Gemini, and Aquarius are “air” signs. Quadruplicities refer to how the three astrological characteristics called “cardinal,” “fixed,” and “mutable” each relate to four signs. For example, Leo, Scorpio, Aquarius, and Taurus are “fixed” signs. And, as you may suspect by now, the concepts of nodes, triplicities, and quadruplicities, like all other astrological principles, have many diverse meanings and interpretations. If all this is not enough mental gymnastics, the astrologer can also consider dignities and debilities; that is, how the influence of a planet is increased (dignity) or decreased (debility) by its placement on the chart. There are dozens of such conditions. He also determines whether the signs are positive (active) or negative (passive). And each astrologer must pay special attention to a client’s moon sign, and to the rising, or ascending, sign. And after all this, the astrologer still must choose which method of prediction he will use. There are three common methods: 1) the previously mentioned transits, 2) primary directions, and 3) secondary progressions. And, “No phase of astrology is subject to such differences of opinion” as the means of prediction. Even with all of this, consider that Noel Tyl wrote a 12-volume series, The Principles and Practices of Astrology, which is considered introductory material! No wonder there is no one final astrological tradition that all astrologers follow. It is understandable why there are so many conflicting astrological theories. Yet, millions of people still commit their lives to following these unproven assumptions.

[LogicalAtheist]

^^^^^ Yeah, what he said. ^^^^^

[Zero]

Originally posted by Artman


quantumcarl, Interesting question. I doubt there is a physical link to the planets, however I wonder if there is a biological link between personality and the seasons of conception, pregnancy and birth? The effects of such things as the mother's emotional condition during the seasons of pregnancy (enduring a third trimester during a hot summer) etc.?

There is always something that can be learned from asking questions.


*Note to aspiring skeptics*

Thiese are the sorts of questions you should be posing, rather than simply rejecting something out of hand. When a new explanation arises, we have a duty to explore it, if for no other reason than to eliminate it. To simply say 'it is nonsense' and move on is to commit the same sort of dogmatic thinking which you accuse others of partaking in.

[Adam]

Originally posted by kyle_soule

Monday - Moon day
Tuesday - Mars' day
Wednesday - Mercury's day
Thursday - Jupiter's day
Friday - Venus' day
Saturday - Saturn's day
Sunday - Sun day

We adopted Germanic/Norse names:
Sunday - Sun day.
Monday - Moon day.
Tuesday - Tiw's day
Wednesday - Woden's (Odin's) day.
Thursday - Thor's day.
Friday - Frigg's day.
Saturday - remained Saturn's day.

[RSM1000]

"The Physics Of Astrology."

An interesting mix of words. Physics in fact is the science which directly proved the claims of Astrology false!

I saw some people mentioned it above a bit, so I won't repeat all the details.... [:D]

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by Adam
We adopted Germanic/Norse names:
Sunday - Sun day.
Monday - Moon day.
Tuesday - Tiw's day
Wednesday - Woden's (Odin's) day.
Thursday - Thor's day.
Friday - Frigg's day.
Saturday - remained Saturn's day.

Odin should have a day, along with his horse.

But astrology claims those to be the days origins. This is what I have learned at least.

"The Physics Of Astrology."

An interesting mix of words. Physics in fact is the science which directly proved the claims of Astrology false!

I saw some people mentioned it above a bit, so I won't repeat all the details....

You are correct, this has already been discussed....but if you would have read through all of the posts you would see that this thread was not intended to be scrutinized from a physics points of view.

EDIT: Kerrie stated, and she WOULD know...

Originally posted by Kerrie
first off, I would like to say that some people's tone in this topic is a little harsh, and they need to not get so defensive about astrology or other "mythical" theories, as it shows a deep streak for intolerance-the human trait that ultimately destroys one another...

as a practicing beginning astrologist:

ASTROLOGY IS NOT A SCIENCE

therefore, it most likely does not fit into the logic of physics...

astrology is a tool, and a language that has been misused by so many that now it will most likely never get a real chance to be fully understood on the objective level...my only proof that it does work are the many people (that i do not know on a personal level) have done natal charts for and have named specific tendencies they possess more so then others...

so, as long as there are people trying to prove it as a science, it will continue to have the reputation it has...for those who understand it's language will find the ability to understand people and their motives much better...

You conclude.

[RSM1000]

Kyle - I did read the whole thing. Why do you assume I did not?

The author posed this statement:

"If anyone has any ideas or solid data that has to do with the physics of astrology... please feel free to share them here."

I have indeed solid data, and that's what I posted.

[Kerrie]

taken from

astrology theosophia (http://[URL=http://http://www.kheper.net/topics/astrology/Astrologia_Theosophia_1.html)

Therefore, think not that mere "floating balls of matter" affect ones destiny from distant regions of space, but rather that the Unity of the Supreme One, in His ineffable Splendor and Mystery, constituted man as a microcosm of the vast universe, and reflects "below" in the material world, that which occurs "above" in the Celestial World. The Mystery is that all is One, connected, and events that occur synchronistically, according to Laws of Nature that are both revealed and concealed, have a mysterious relationship

please note that my own views of "him" are not exactly as this author's perspective...it also starts the text off as astrology being the oldest science, but i think the definition of science in this text is used very loosely...

[pelastration]

I put on my website an animated gif-image (which I made for another website): http://mu6.com/astrology.html

This is the text that goes with it:

Astrology. What can be a possible explanation?

Since the HUBBLE telescope we know that our Universe is GIANT! Behind each spot there are thousands of stars, thus photons, neutrino's and also radiation is sent to us. A planet is a just a moving spot. It has it's own structure (cfr. Jupiter is only gas).

A possible explanation for Astrology can be that each planet acts as a lens (focusing the energies it receives) or as a blocking structure (dispensing/spreading) for these energy bombardments.

In this animated image I made a green square and a white square with in each some galaxies. These may have each billions of light years in distance between them, so they may send other types of radiation. The green and white spot on the trajectory of Mars will be -at a specific moment - covered by Mars and at that moment Mars might "re-transmit" these energies, colored by it's own structural composition.

A transit over such spots might influence the concept of embryo's during specific growing phases (think about the basic start of the eyes in week X, nerves in week Z, synapses in week Y, ...

Third Week.—By the end of the third week the embryo is strongly curved, and the primitive segments number about thirty. The primary divisions of the brain are visible, and the optic and auditory vesicles are formed. Four branchial grooves are present: the stomodeum is well-marked, and the bucco-pharyngeal membrane has disappeared. The rudiments of the limbs are seen as short buds, and the Wolffian bodies are visible, ...

Fifth Week.—The embryo is less curved and the head is relatively of large size. Differentiation of the limbs into their segments occurs. The nose forms a short, flattened projection. The cloacal tubercle is evident ...

Sixth Month.—The body is covered by fine hairs (lanugo) and the deposit of vernix caseosa is considerable. The papillæ of the skin are developed and the free border of the nail projects from the corium of the dermis. Measured from vertex to heels, the total length of the fetus at the end of this month is from 30 to 32 cm.).
If you need the other details: http://www.bartleby.com/107/15.html

The fast planets (Mercury, Venus, Mars and Moon) pass such different areas every day. Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus, Neptune and Pluto do it slowly.

-----------
http://publicold.web.cern.ch/PublicOld/SCIENCE/cosmicmessengers.html
quote: Cosmic messengers
Among the commonest particles in the Universe are neutrinos. Like photons, they outnumber the protons and neutrons of bulk matter by around one thousand millions to one. Each cubic centimetre of space contains a hundred or so neutrinos left over from the Big Bang at the beginning of the Universe. Every second, 60 thousand million neutrinos from the Sun pass through each square centimetre of the Earth surface and through you!

... and they pass through those baby ... in week x, y, ... while different type of emissions originated from other cosmic spots passed each planet that maybe ... acts as a (gravitational = intensify radiation) lens or as a blocking structure?

You need more?
Quote: Sit quietly, and count off 10 seconds to yourself. Roughly 200 trillion neutrinos from the sun, from cosmic rays, and from distant supernovas have just passed through you, but you'd never know it. Neutrinos are the ghostliest of subatomic ... click:
http://pr.caltech.edu/periodicals/EandS/articles/Boehm/boehm1.html

Oh yes ... there also this: http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993282 : _Einstein's general theory of relativity assumes that the force of gravity propagates at the speed of light. Sergei Kopeikin of the University of Missouri in Columbia came up with an experiment.
He argued that the time delay of a light signal passing through the gravitational field of a moving planet depends on the speed of gravity. What is more, he said, it should be possible to measure the effect, and hence gravity's speed, by watching how Jupiter's gravity bends background light.
In September 2002, Kopeikin and his colleague Ed Fomalont of the National Radio Astronomy Observatory in Charlottesville, Virginia, did that using radio telescopes around the world. Their conclusion was that gravity does indeed move at the speed of light.

I believe it is intellectual weakness to deny apriori a number of phenomena.
We must say: IF it would be real HOW would it work?

Now I saw on this thread a lot of scientific superiority. But has physics all the answers? The 10 most fundamental questions: http://www.qub.ac.uk/mp/questions/questions.html , such as number 10 : When a particle in a quantum-mechanically pure state disappears into a black hole, its state changes to a thermal one; it now has a particular temperature. This constitutes a fundamental violation of the laws of quantum theory. How does it occur?

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by pelastration
I put on my website an animated gif-image (which I made for another website): http://mu6.com/astrology.html

This is the text that goes with it:

Astrology. What can be a possible explanation?

Since the HUBBLE telescope we know that our Universe is GIANT! Behind each spot there are thousands of stars, thus photons, neutrino's and also radiation is sent to us. A planet is a just a moving spot. It has it's own structure (cfr. Jupiter is only gas).

A possible explanation for Astrology can be that each planet acts as a lens (focusing the energies it receives) or as a blocking structure (dispensing/spreading) for these energy bombardments.

In this animated image I made a green square and a white square with in each some galaxies. These may have each billions of light years in distance between them, so they may send other types of radiation. The green and white spot on the trajectory of Mars will be -at a specific moment - covered by Mars and at that moment Mars might "re-transmit" these energies, colored by it's own structural composition.

A transit over such spots might influence the concept of embryo's during specific growing phases (think about the basic start of the eyes in week X, nerves in week Z, synapses in week Y, ...

Third Week.—By the end of the third week the embryo is strongly curved, and the primitive segments number about thirty. The primary divisions of the brain are visible, and the optic and auditory vesicles are formed. Four branchial grooves are present: the stomodeum is well-marked, and the bucco-pharyngeal membrane has disappeared. The rudiments of the limbs are seen as short buds, and the Wolffian bodies are visible, ...

Fifth Week.—The embryo is less curved and the head is relatively of large size. Differentiation of the limbs into their segments occurs. The nose forms a short, flattened projection. The cloacal tubercle is evident ...

Sixth Month.—The body is covered by fine hairs (lanugo) and the deposit of vernix caseosa is considerable. The papillæ of the skin are developed and the free border of the nail projects from the corium of the dermis. Measured from vertex to heels, the total length of the fetus at the end of this month is from 30 to 32 cm.).
If you need the other details: http://www.bartleby.com/107/15.html

The fast planets (Mercury, Venus, Mars and Moon) pass such different areas every day. Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus, Neptune and Pluto do it slowly.

-----------
http://publicold.web.cern.ch/PublicOld/SCIENCE/cosmicmessengers.html
quote: Cosmic messengers
Among the commonest particles in the Universe are neutrinos. Like photons, they outnumber the protons and neutrons of bulk matter by around one thousand millions to one. Each cubic centimetre of space contains a hundred or so neutrinos left over from the Big Bang at the beginning of the Universe. Every second, 60 thousand million neutrinos from the Sun pass through each square centimetre of the Earth surface and through you!

... and they pass through those baby ... in week x, y, ... while different type of emissions originated from other cosmic spots passed each planet that maybe ... acts as a (gravitational = intensify radiation) lens or as a blocking structure?

You need more?
Quote: Sit quietly, and count off 10 seconds to yourself. Roughly 200 trillion neutrinos from the sun, from cosmic rays, and from distant supernovas have just passed through you, but you'd never know it. Neutrinos are the ghostliest of subatomic ... click:
http://pr.caltech.edu/periodicals/EandS/articles/Boehm/boehm1.html

Oh yes ... there also this: http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993282 : _Einstein's general theory of relativity assumes that the force of gravity propagates at the speed of light. Sergei Kopeikin of the University of Missouri in Columbia came up with an experiment.
He argued that the time delay of a light signal passing through the gravitational field of a moving planet depends on the speed of gravity. What is more, he said, it should be possible to measure the effect, and hence gravity's speed, by watching how Jupiter's gravity bends background light.
In September 2002, Kopeikin and his colleague Ed Fomalont of the National Radio Astronomy Observatory in Charlottesville, Virginia, did that using radio telescopes around the world. Their conclusion was that gravity does indeed move at the speed of light.

I believe it is intellectual weakness to deny apriori a number of phenomena.
We must say: IF it would be real HOW would it work?

Now I saw on this thread a lot of scientific superiority. But has physics all the answers? The 10 most fundamental questions: http://www.qub.ac.uk/mp/questions/questions.html , such as number 10 : When a particle in a quantum-mechanically pure state disappears into a black hole, its state changes to a thermal one; it now has a particular temperature. This constitutes a fundamental violation of the laws of quantum theory. How does it occur?

These are great ideas, pelastration. I won't steal any of them!

I especially like the bits about planets and other structures blocking elements of the universe. The common view is that they cause an effect... rather than cause the lack of an effect...

thanks for bringing some pioneering spirit to this thread!

[Integral]

Using fundamental Newtonian physics it is easy to calculate the force that planets, the sun, the moon or any distant star exerts on the human body. When the numbers are crunched, it turns out that the doctor or nurse standing near a new born baby exert stronger gravataionsl force then any other massive body in the univers (other then the earth). I think it is save to say that the planets cannot have any effect on our emotial makeup.

HOWEVER:

LA made a totally false statement a few days back, He claimed that 3 OCT 03 was similar to 3 Oct 02 only in the name, this is patentley false, 3 Oct 03 has the same amount of DAYLIGHT as 3 OCT 02 (or any other 3OCT to within a few minutes. It does depend a bit on how far from a leap year you are. This is true in spite of the fact that 3 OCT lies in the period of rapid day lenght change.

In my mind the only possible valid astronomical effect on a presons emotional make up is the length of daylight that person is exposed to in the early months of life. A June/July baby will will know little of heavy clothing and darkness, while a Dec/Jan Baby will be continuoulsy bundled and will see little of the outside environment.

Of course these effects will be reversed with the hemisphere, and more strongly felt in the ancient days when all humans were more exposed to the elements. In our current culture we move rapidly from house to car to house with little time spent outside, this is esspecially true for newborn infants.

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by Integral
Using fundamental Newtonian physics it is easy to calculate the force that planets, the sun, the moon or any distant star exerts on the human body. When the numbers are crunched, it turns out that the doctor or nurse standing near a new born baby exert stronger gravataionsl force then any other massive body in the univers (other then the earth). I think it is save to say that the planets cannot have any effect on our emotial makeup.



You may want to find some proof to back up this statement. Its fine to speculate... like I always do... but, if you are going to question my speculations with your speculations... this goes absolutely no where...

so, please provide proof that a nurse or a doctor (mid-wife or father) standing beside the birthing mother and the new born have more effect on the new born than other environmental factors.

Try crunching the numbers.

What is the molecular weight of the mother, doctor, father, nurse and interns=combined when compared to the molecular weight of Pluto, Neptune, Saturn and 6 other planets plus the Sun?

Now compare relative gravitational influences.

Now compare the blockage created by the above nonclementures (as presented by pelastration) and the effects on the new born... or ovum et al.

[Integral]

The relationship is simple, I kinda figured you would be courious enough to do it yourself, guess not.

so the force of gravition between two bodies is

F= Gm1m2/r2
G=6.67E-11 Ntm2kg-2
let us assume that the mass of baby is 4kg It the table below I am assumeing a moderate weight for the docter and have computed the distance to the planets as their CLOSEST approach to earth. As you can see the force due to the planets is indeed larger if the dr is 1 meter from the baby, but smaller if the docter is holding the baby. So if we were to consider the mass of the hospital or of any massive machinery in the room with the baby, perhaps the bed would count, you can see that the influence of the planets is not significant.
for the Dr
Mass= 75kg
Distance = 1m
force= .200E-07N

DR holding baby
Mass= 75kg
distance=.1m
Force= 20.0E-07N

Jupiter
mass = 1.90E+27kg
distace= 7.20E+11m
Force = 9.78E-07N

Mars
Mass = 6.40E+23kg
Distance = 8.00E+10m
Force= .267E-07N

Venus
Mass = 4.90E+24kg
Distance= 5.00E+10m
Force = 5.23E-07N

By the way Molecular weight has nothing to do with the problem. I have given you the formula you need to compute the force due to the distant stars, if you can do a web search and find the mass and distace.

Also the formula used assumes a shperical doctor, if you were to compute the force considering the distribution of mass it may be somewhat different, but of the same order of magnitude.

[Integral]

The relationship is simple, I kinda figured you would be courious enough to do it yourself, guess not.

so the force of gravition between two bodies is

F= Gm1m2/r2
G=6.67E-11 Ntm2kg-2
let us assume that the mass of baby is 4kg It the table below I am assuming a moderate weight for the docter and have computed the distance to the planets as their CLOSEST approach to earth. As you can see the force due to the planets is indeed larger if the dr is 1 meter from the baby, but smaller if the docter is holding the baby. So if we were to consider the mass of the hospital or of any massive machinery in the room with the baby, perhaps the bed would count, you can see that the influence of the planets is not significant.
for the Dr
Mass= 75kg
Distance = 1m
force= .200E-07N

DR holding baby
Mass= 75kg
distance=.1m
Force= 20.0E-07N

Jupiter
mass = 1.90E+27kg
distace= 7.20E+11m
Force = 9.78E-07N

Mars
Mass = 6.40E+23kg
Distance = 8.00E+10m
Force= .267E-07N

Venus
Mass = 4.90E+24kg
Distance= 5.00E+10m
Force = 5.23E-07N

By the way Molecular weight has nothing to do with the problem. I have given you the formula you need to compute the force due to the distant stars, if you can do a web search and find the mass and distace.

Also the formula used assumes a shperical doctor, if you were to compute the force considering the distribution of mass it may be somewhat different, but of the same order of magnitude.

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by Integral
The relationship is simple, I kinda figured you would be courious enough to do it yourself, guess not.

so the force of gravition between two bodies is

F= Gm1m2/r2
G=6.67E-11 Ntm2kg-2
let us assume that the mass of baby is 4kg It the table below I am assuming a moderate weight for the docter and have computed the distance to the planets as their CLOSEST approach to earth. As you can see the force due to the planets is indeed larger if the dr is 1 meter from the baby, but smaller if the docter is holding the baby. So if we were to consider the mass of the hospital or of any massive machinery in the room with the baby, perhaps the bed would count, you can see that the influence of the planets is not significant.
for the Dr
Mass= 75kg
Distance = 1m
force= .200E-07N

DR holding baby
Mass= 75kg
distance=.1m
Force= 20.0E-07N

Jupiter
mass = 1.90E+27kg
distace= 7.20E+11m
Force = 9.78E-07N

Mars
Mass = 6.40E+23kg
Distance = 8.00E+10m
Force= .267E-07N

Venus
Mass = 4.90E+24kg
Distance= 5.00E+10m
Force = 5.23E-07N

By the way Molecular weight has nothing to do with the problem. I have given you the formula you need to compute the force due to the distant stars, if you can do a web search and find the mass and distace.

Also the formula used assumes a shperical doctor, if you were to compute the force considering the distribution of mass it may be somewhat different, but of the same order of magnitude.

This is beautiful! Thanks for all the work on this.

What I am assuming about astrology is that distance is factored out... presence is factored in... it is my assumption that astrology is a quantum medium. This may be why it is considered "psuedo".

Does this help to diminish the importance of your equasions?

Distance being relative only. I realize this is a relative universe... according to our 5 senses. But I believe there is a considerable influencial dynamic exerted upon the relative by the quantum existance or the existance of the quantum universe.

In any case, when we remove distance... I believe the planets have the doctor, nurse, baby, MRI magnet, hospital-total, cement outside, mountain range nearby and the planet earth pretty well out weighed and well influenced.

Please excuse the "molecular weight" thing screw up. I meant weight or as you have incredibly pointed out "mass". Thanks again.

[Integral]

I have shown you the physics, what you speak of is not physics. I thought this was a thread of the Physics of Astrology. The only possible physical force acting is that of gravity. I have shown that the physical effects of distanct astronomical objects cannot be of sifnificance. Though in my original post I did provide significant effect which varies with the season that could be a factor in human emotional make up. I am somewhat surprised that you have not even mentioned that.

[pelastration]

Originally posted by Integral
Using fundamental Newtonian physics it is easy to calculate the force that planets, the sun, the moon or any distant star exerts on the human body. When the numbers are crunched, it turns out that the doctor or nurse standing near a new born baby exert stronger gravataionsl force then any other massive body in the univers (other then the earth). I think it is save to say that the planets cannot have any effect on our emotial makeup.

You speak about a new born baby.
In the new born baby his basic structure is already fixed.
The baby's basic structure will not be changed by the presence of the doctor or the nurse.

We need to look to the situations/stages of GROWTH ... of the embryo .
If due a cosmic event X the 'first' basic cellular splitting of organ Y is influenced in a negative way that organ Y will have a "bad start" which will influence it's later growth as embryo, and it's later function when born and in it's further life.

Originally posted by pelastration
I put on my website an animated gif-image (which I made for another website): http://mu6.com/astrology.html
A possible explanation for Astrology can be that each planet acts as a lens (focusing the energies it receives) or as a blocking structure (dispensing/spreading) for these energy bombardments.

In this animated image I made a green square and a white square with in each some galaxies. These may have each billions of light years in distance between them, so they may send other types of radiation. The green and white spot on the trajectory of Mars will be -at a specific moment - covered by Mars and at that moment Mars might "re-transmit" these energies, colored by it's own structural composition.

A transit over such spots might influence the concept of embryo's during specific growing phases (think about the basic start of the eyes in week X, nerves in week Z, synapses in week Y, ...

Third Week.—By the end of the third week the embryo is strongly curved, and the primitive segments number about thirty. The primary divisions of the brain are visible, and the optic and auditory vesicles are formed.

So specific and "temporal unique' radiation maybe determinate the outcome of very important BASIC stages in the embryo's growth. That will influence the complete further structure of the embryo.
For example: when in the third week the optic and auditory vesicles are formed and the energy bombardments are of quality Z then the eyes and ears will contain a layer with Z quality.

------
http://www.aps.uoguelph.ca/~swatland/ch8_2.htm

While the newly formed animal is developing its various types of tissues it is called an embryo but, after these tissues are acquired and until birth or hatching, it is called a foetus.

Stages of Embryology

In a telolecithal egg, cell division starts as a small disk and does not spread very far into the viscous yolk mass on which the disk is located.

Cleavage is the process by which a zygote or fertilized ovum subdivides into smaller cells called blastomeres. When a new embryo has subdivided into a ball of eight or more blastomeres, but has not yet formed layers of blastomeres, it is called a morula.

The morula starts to form a new animal from a clump cells called the inner call mass(A). Then the morula forms itself into a layer of cells called the trophoblast(B) surrounding a fluid filled space - the blastocoele(C) .

The trophoblast contributes to the placenta and is lost at birth. The inner cell mass together with the trophoblast form a blasotocyst. The embryo developing from the inner cell mass becomes roofed-over by amniotic folds that later fuse to form a complete layer - the amnion.

Endoderm cells (F; which eventually form the gut and its associated organs like the liver) spread from the inner cell mass over the inner surface of the trophoblast and, at this stage, the blastocyst is said to be bilaminar or two- layered.

The blastocyst becomes trilaminar or three-layered when mesoderm cells (E; which eventually will form muscles, bones, and fat) migrate from the inner cell mass spreads between the outer trophoblast layer and the inner endoderm layer.

The mesoderm layer then splits internally, and a cavity expands within the mesoderm to become the extra-embryonic coelom(G).

F. Organogenesis

Germ layers differentiate
i. Ectoderm
--Brain, nervous system, hair, and skin
--Neural tube a primary target of malnutrition

ii. Mesoderm
--Muscles, Bones, Cardiovascular, Reproductive, and Excretory Systems
--Also a major target of malnutrition and toxins.

iii. Endoderm
--Digestive and respiratory systems, some glandular organs.

[Integral]

pelastration,

What ever. In that case the size of car the mother has been riding in, the side of the bed she sleeps on, the proximity of the refridgerator, all of the objects which are part of the life of the mother will have a larger physical effect then the planets.


Why do you waste server space by quoting yourself?

[Kerrie]

in my own personal opinion, it might be possible that the "physics" of astrology are yet to be discovered...

as the law of correspondence goes, when one believes that everything in the universe has a connection (even a minute one)

as above, so below
as within, so without
as the universe, so the soul

for those who choose not to see how this works, will not understand the language of astrology...it is not a science, and therefore physics as we know it today, will not be able to "prove" it...

[pelastration]

Originally posted by Integral
pelastration,
What ever. In that case the size of car the mother has been riding in, the side of the bed she sleeps on, the proximity of the refridgerator, all of the objects which are part of the life of the mother will have a larger physical effect then the planets.
I seems you don't get it ... or don't want even to try to understand it.

But indeed we may not exclude that a 'radiating' microwave device may influence also the billions momenta of 'essential' cell splitting of mesoderm, endoderm, ectoderm in the embryo.
The massive neutrino impact (and maybe particles not yet discovered) will influence much stronger than rather passive objects because:
- some transits of slow planet take a long time of CONSTANT lensing or repulsion/shielding.
- particle bombardment may destroy of mutate on the fundament levels of bounding.

Since the Moon is very fast and sizewise massive its influence will be large in magnitude too.
Probably yesterday eclipse will have also influence on the just procreated embryo's since their starting splitting just started.
Originally posted by Integral
Why do you waste server space by quoting yourself?
Since you pay the bills I understand that such unacceptable behavior worries you.
I repeated that because I understood you didn't understood. I was right.
OK I will ignore your NEXT reply to make the balance back.
Of course you can report it to yourself and exclude me from this thread or even of PF.

[Integral]

Chill out!

Why the agression? I have been talking physics, you are being obnoxious, why?

IF you consider the fact that the moon, makes nine complete revolutions of the earth during the gestation period of a baby it essentially nullifies itself.

But indeed we may not exclude that a 'radiating' microwave device may influence also the billions momenta of 'essential' cell splitting of mesoderm, endoderm, ectoderm in the embryo.

You are absoulty correct, I do not understand a word of this, what are you saying?

If you will read my posts you may notice that I am talking about gravity, I have spoken of daylengty as a significant factor. You seem to be ignoring my posts and rambling on about an entirely different topic. If you are going to quote me please address my posts.

[pelastration]

Originally posted by Kerrie
in my own personal opinion, it might be possible that the "physics" of astrology are yet to be discovered...

as the law of correspondence goes, when one believes that everything in the universe has a connection (even a minute one)

as above, so below
as within, so without
as the universe, so the soul

for those who choose not to see how this works, will not understand the language of astrology...it is not a science, and therefore physics as we know it today, will not be able to "prove" it...
;-)
Indeed. When you don't want to see it ... you will not see it.
My target is to 'integrate' in an integral way the various aspects in a logic knowledge system.
Progress always starts on the abstract level, then is materialized in matter (brain, symbols, letters, maths, paper, books, website, ... and eventually patents and products). That takes time ...
Every product - like a telephone, a car, the Web - started with a dream, an idea, ...

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by Kerrie
in my own personal opinion, it might be possible that the "physics" of astrology are yet to be discovered...

as the law of correspondence goes, when one believes that everything in the universe has a connection (even a minute one)

as above, so below
as within, so without
as the universe, so the soul

for those who choose not to see how this works, will not understand the language of astrology...it is not a science, and therefore physics as we know it today, will not be able to "prove" it...

Thanks for coming back Kerrie. You have a point. However, astrology has been known to prove itself... with no one's help!!!

OK Integral... I think Kerrie has made a point about what I'm asking here. There has been little effort put into the actual mechanics involved with astrology. We are pioneering.

Loop quantum gravity may play a factor in the physics of astrology.

Pelastration: The New Born idea comes from the fact that, AT BIRTH, the personality goes through an incredible TRAUMA... during this trauma the personality may be far more suseptable to certain positions, placements, presence and other psuedo-relative-quantum factors.

[pelastration]

Originally posted by quantumcarl
Thanks for coming back Kerrie. You have a point. However, astrology has been known to prove itself... with no one's help!!!

OK Integral... I think Kerrie has made a point about what I'm asking here. There has been little effort put into the actual mechanics involved with astrology. We are pioneering.

Loop quantum gravity may play a factor in the physics of astrology.

Pelastration: The New Born idea comes from the fact that, AT BIRTH, the personality goes through an incredible TRAUMA... during this trauma the personality may be far more suseptable to certain positions, placements, presence and other psuedo-relative-quantum factors.
quantumcarl ... the new born doesn't falls from the blue. ;-)
It's various growth phases will influence also his perception ... and the birth trauma is one of the factors. For sure during growth the child is in a kind of quantum superposition and at birth this state of mind comes to consciousness.

Kerrie, maybe you will appreciate some more explanation on : "But indeed we may not exclude that a 'radiating' microwave device may influence also the billions momenta of 'essential' cell splitting of mesoderm, endoderm, ectoderm in the embryo."

We need now to materialize some terms:
On the moment of Fertilization (lets take as symbol F) the cell starts to split in three essential levels: mesoderm (M), endoderm (En), ectoderm (Ec).
Cell splitting: 1 ->2 ->4 ->8 ->16 -> 32 ->64 ->128 -> , etc. Lets relate them to TIME (T).
T16 means the number of days in which the numbers n of cells are made.

RSj : is the symbol for the Radiation Shielded by Jupiter.
RSm: is the symbol for the Radiation Shielded by Moon. etc.
RLj: is the symbol for the Radiation Lensed by Jupiter. etc.
RLs: is the symbol for the Radiation Lensed by Saturn. etc.
RBx : is the symbol for the Radiation Bombardment by Space sector x. etc.
RQx: is the symbol for the Radiation quality Space sector x. etc. To simply let say there are green (g = harmonic) and red (r = disharmonic) qualities. RQxg= thus positive.


Example:
On Jan 1, 2000, on T1 'Little John' was procreated.
At that moment T1 there was (1) RSj of RBx with RQxg and (2) RLs of RBy of RQyg.
Let hypothese that M (mesoderm) is most sensible to RQxg - which is shielded at that moment: -> growth of M: the first M cells is retarded.
Let hypothese that Ec is most sensible to RQyg - which is Einstein lensed at that moment: -> growth of Ec: the first Ec cells are boosted.

So the growth of Little John first cells is unbalanced: M is less developed than Ec.
Because of M is less developed in it's basic structure little John will ALWAYS have a basic problem related to all organs following from M (Muscles, Bones, Cardiovascular, Reproductive, and Excretory Systems).

But lucky for Little John Ec was more developed in it's basic structure so he will ALWAYS have a basic advantage related to all organs following from Ec (Brain, nervous system, hair, and skin) and influence migration of related cells.

Now if Little Mary is procreated on March 21, 2000 the positions and conditions of Jupiter (RB z155) and Saturn (RBf3511) have changed since Jan 1 2000 (the T1 of Little John). So Little Mary's M and Ec will have a different growing pattern than Little John's.
Maybe here M (bones) is over-excited by RLj giving here the basics for a larger head.

Now while Little Mary is in here T1 our Little John is already in his T80. And thus RLj will cause in Little John an over-excitement on a growth phase in for example En (T80: the finishing phase in a specific glandular organ).

Next to this a device like a micro-wave oven, a television set, a mobile, ... will also radiate frequencies which may damage or over-excite M, Ec and En.
And also other environmental aspects like photons (daylight) and occasional events like food may will influence T1, T2 --> ±T270.

We may presume that during the development of M, Ec and En there are very essential KEY-moments.
The T1 to T10 will surely be essential since at these moments the basic qualities of M, Ec and En are determinated. Around T21 the eyes are started ... so there again there will be billions of combinations, but the basics of the eyes are already settled in T1 to T10.

Some people may think that 'IF you consider the fact that the moon, makes nine complete revolutions of the earth during the gestation period of a baby it essentially nullifies itself. '
Of course this is not correct since such a view puts T1, T28, T56 ... on the same level.

So the development is like a tree with all kind of branches. Once a branch starts all his sub-branches and leaves and fruit will inherent follow that position and qualities.

I hope you understand.

This link can be interesting: Radiation Health Effects of Dosages <http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~meshkati/tefall99/part1.html>

[Kerrie]

typically, astrologers do not consider the celestial aspects to affect a fetus entirely dependent on it's mother for life...natal astrology works at the time of birth, because at that moment the individual has free will away from the mother who had housed him or her in a womb...

[pelastration]

Originally posted by Kerrie
typically, astrologers do not consider the celestial aspects to affect a fetus entirely dependent on it's mother for life...natal astrology works at the time of birth, because at that moment the individual has free will away from the mother who had housed him or her in a womb...
Kerrie, since 1964 I make astrologic themes. ;-)
I use them to receive information which can not be obtained in another way.
I am open to any system of information gathering. I never say apriori "no". So in 1964 I said: let's see. And indeed it's usefull for sure.
But that doesn't make it to me an absolute system.
If you want to come to a Physics of astrology you need to include parameters like Mesoderm, ectoderm and endoderm because they are the basic physical defolding in the physical world. Then you can link them to chakra's and if you want to reincarnation and conservation of energy.
Western astrology is nice and analytic , but the sythesizing Chinese is nice too.

As said in my previous reply: the moment of birth is the change of mind from superposition to self-consciousness as an indepent unity.

[Artman]

Originally posted by Kerrie
typically, astrologers do not consider the celestial aspects to affect a fetus entirely dependent on it's mother for life...natal astrology works at the time of birth, because at that moment the individual has free will away from the mother who had housed him or her in a womb...

Kerrie, is the exact time and place (hemisphere) of birth is acounted for?

QuantumCarl, I asked this because, as the saying goes, "The moon is always full, you just can't always see it." In other words, the relation of the child at time and place of birth to the heavens, if indeed significant, is greatly altered by a few hours. The earth could place itself between the child and several heavenly bodies and negate or alter any influence of gravity, electro magnetism, radiation field, etc. from those sources.

As I said earlier, if there is a relationship of Astrology to a physical science I would look closer to the child. There are proven correlations between the mother's food and drug intake during pregnancy and the child's condition after birth (children born with addictions of drug addict mother's, birth defects from drinking alcohol, etc.). Eating habits and sleeping habits change with the seasons (some foods are more readily available on a seasonal basis such as fruit and vegetables and the way they are processed, some people don't go to bed until after dark even early to bed types). Temperature on the day before a child is born could have an effect far greater than the position of Mars on the birthday, etc.

I would look closer for a relationship of science to Astrology.

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by Artman
Kerrie, is the exact time and place (hemisphere) of birth is acounted for?

QuantumCarl, I asked this because, as the saying goes, "The moon is always full, you just can't always see it." In other words, the relation of the child at time and place of birth to the heavens, if indeed significant, is greatly altered by a few hours. The earth could place itself between the child and several heavenly bodies and negate or alter any influence of gravity, electro magnetism, radiation field, etc. from those sources.

As I said earlier, if there is a relationship of Astrology to a physical science I would look closer to the child. There are proven correlations between the mother's food and drug intake during pregnancy and the child's condition after birth (children born with addictions of drug addict mother's, birth defects from drinking alcohol, etc.). Eating habits and sleeping habits change with the seasons (some foods are more readily available on a seasonal basis such as fruit and vegetables and the way they are processed, some people don't go to bed until after dark even early to bed types). Temperature on the day before a child is born could have an effect far greater than the position of Mars on the birthday, etc.

I would look closer for a relationship of science to Astrology.

I don't have time to go into all of this but I will remind the audience that the tides are governed by the moon and its phases... and, not suprizingly, lunacy seems to tie in there somewhere.

I will also note that when a person is born the astrologer calculates what planet and what constellations are RISING... as in on or above the horizon of the new born's event horizon.

These implications and suppositions seem to take care of some of the raized questions in the quote above. Thank you.

[Artman]

The moon may well have an effect, but hasn't it had it all through the pregnancy? What if the baby is born on a moving vehicle? Does the direction that the mother is facing during the delivery make a difference? What about a breach birth?

Too many variables.

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by Artman
The moon may well have an effect, but hasn't it had it all through the pregnancy? What if the baby is born on a moving vehicle? Does the direction that the mother is facing during the delivery make a difference? What about a breach birth?

Too many variables.

Many variables indeed.

I will take a post from FZ+ (I believe it was him who posted this) and apply it here...

If you drop a pen the chances of it landing in a certain spot are astronomically inprobable, many many variables can affect its final resting spot. But you can very easily guess the basic area it will land in, and with a high degree of accuracy. All astrology does, I believe, is make fairly, not entirely, rough estimates of personalities, and such. And with the methods it describes it can be fairly accurate.

I certainly do not believe astrology, I posted a while back a lengthy post that outlines my position, but it is just as accurate as any method you could come up with in gauging ones future.

[Artman]

Originally posted by kyle_soule
...I certainly do not believe astrology, I posted a while back a lengthy post that outlines my position, but it is just as accurate as any method you could come up with in gauging ones future.

The odd thing is that I have seen a correlation between several personality types and their Astrological sign. My wife is a classic example of her sign of Gemini, I am a typical Libra, I know several others who fit well with theirs. I doubt that the alignment of the planets at the moment of birth could effect this, considering the variable factors that are not the same at the same month in different years and in different hemispheres. The sun and the moon are not as variable as say the position of Jupiter or its relation to Mars and Venus, etc.

[Kerrie]

The moon may well have an effect, but hasn't it had it all through the pregnancy? What if the baby is born on a moving vehicle? Does the direction that the mother is facing during the delivery make a difference? What about a breach birth?

astrology is a "struggle" of sorts between the independent free will of a human being (fetuses are not considered to have this yet) vs. the "blue print" of tendencies, strengths, and weakness aka: the natal chart

EXACT time is best in order for the natal chart to be accurate

latitude and longitude are considered when calculating the place of birth, so i don't think a moving vehicle would make much of a difference...the earth moves a whole lot faster then a car anyway...

breach birth makes no difference...as what matters is the exact time when the child is free from her mother..

libra and gemini are both "air" signs, you both are probably more intellectual then emotional, spiritual or logical...

astrology affects more of a person's pychology over a physical health, although i have studied many charts and compared to a person's health...the moon and rising sign of a person can determine vulnerable parts of the body should illness set in...

[kyle_soule]

Originally posted by Artman
The odd thing is that I have seen a correlation between several personality types and their Astrological sign. My wife is a classic example of her sign of Gemini, I am a typical Libra, I know several others who fit well with theirs. I doubt that the alignment of the planets at the moment of birth could effect this, considering the variable factors that are not the same at the same month in different years and in different hemispheres. The sun and the moon are not as variable as say the position of Jupiter or its relation to Mars and Venus, etc.

It is true you will notice tendencies towards personalities, but the predictions of personalities aren't always accurate, and are pretty vague and cover a large portion of the population. I think you will also find people 'forming' themselves to fit their sign, or disregarding the predictions that aren't true.

[pelastration]

Originally posted by Kerrie
astrology is a "struggle" of sorts between the independent free will of a human being (fetuses are not considered to have this yet) vs. the "blue print" of tendencies, strengths, and weakness aka: the natal chart
Kerrie, do you think astrology's departure point is the idea of reincarnation?If so, the conception (Spirit - chakratic - coupling with DNA) is the start of the vehicle. In such case growing - as putting extra material layers over the spirit - makes the spiritual entity to 'forget' his spiritual experiences of past lives. What is your opinion about this?

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by Kerrie
astrology is a "struggle" of sorts between the independent free will of a human being (fetuses are not considered to have this yet) vs. the "blue print" of tendencies, strengths, and weakness aka: the natal chart

EXACT time is best in order for the natal chart to be accurate

latitude and longitude are considered when calculating the place of birth, so i don't think a moving vehicle would make much of a difference...the earth moves a whole lot faster then a car anyway...

breach birth makes no difference...as what matters is the exact time when the child is free from her mother..

libra and gemini are both "air" signs, you both are probably more intellectual then emotional, spiritual or logical...

astrology affects more of a person's pychology over a physical health, although i have studied many charts and compared to a person's health...the moon and rising sign of a person can determine vulnerable parts of the body should illness set in...

This sort of information is invaluable to what we are trying to determine in this thread... the physics of astrology. Physics is all about positions, effects, coordinates and prediction. Simlarily, as Kerrie has illustrated... astrology tends toward these same sentiments and synergies. Thanks Kerrie.

[Kerrie]

thanks russ...i also think it is important for those who are considering the validity of astrology also be as well educated in astronomy and geometry, as knowledge in both will help tremendously in understaning how astrology functions...

palestration, i am not sure i understand your suggestion completely?

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by Kerrie
thanks russ...i also think it is important for those who are considering the validity of astrology also be as well educated in astronomy and geometry, as knowledge in both will help tremendously in understaning how astrology functions...

palestration, i am not sure i understand your suggestion completely?

Russ??!? You can call me qc !

[pelastration]

Originally posted by Kerrie
palestration, i am not sure i understand your suggestion completely?
Ok I rephrase, but in fact and answer also ;-)

1. What's the vision behind astrology ?
I always thought it is based on the idea of reincarnation. (which is conservation of spiritual energy).
By astrology it is thus possible to see in what phase the person (the vehicle) is in the karmatic wheel.

2. During the procreation (the act) the free spiritual vehicle connects with the matter (DNA) through the chakra-connections. From that moment spirit and body are joined.

3. After this basic joint the embryo grows. It is still conscious about it's past spiritual life and spiritual entity.

4. But the more the embryo grows the more it is involved in body-related development. Extra material layers make that the attention changes from spiritual to material focus. That's because now the conservation of the new body is most important.
That makes that the spiritual entity 'forget' his past spiritual experiences.
So the foetus has after nine months almost a 'blank' consciousness.

5. The shock/trauma of birth pushes the baby in a new reality. The moment of birth, the place of birth and corresponding positions of planets indicate the future "perception of reality".
You can say: with what colored spectacles will this person see in this life? If he or she has red glasses he or she will see everything with a red shine, etc..
The moment and place gives the Ascendant and Midheaven (most important houses), and exact aspects between the planets.

6. Because the combinations of positions of the planets are unique the same positions will occur only back in about 16,000 years. That makes us unique.

7. Of course the basic physical properties of the person started with: the DNA given by the parents.
and other factors:
8. - the moment of conception which indicates what planet trajectories in the next nine months may excite the growth phases of endoderm, mesoderm and ectoderm (see previous),
9. the seasons and light influence.
10. the food and other exogenous factors of the mother (smoking, drugs, smog, radiation, ...).

In my opinion important:
A. The dynamics of life: the social impact related to percept reality (influence of religion, family, school, ...) will also play next to point 5.
B. Astrology - and the karma - include some predestination. This is not absolute. The future has periodical degrees of self-generating repetition: the person will repeat some failures again and again, till he transcends by insight.
C. Astrology predicts that structural problems (spiritual and physical) will be excited when fundamental weak spots are attacked by specific planetary positions (cfr. shielding / lensed). This happens also in positive sense. Example: a 'bad' aspect of some planets including the Moon may repeat every seven days (two squares + one opposition + one conjunction), but also every seven years.

Of course there is more ...

What is your opinion about this?

[Kerrie]

palestration~

I am not sure if I think that astrology shows the "progress" of where a person is in the karmatic wheel. I believe the energy that makes us alive is influenced by the celestial aspects, but that energy doesn't necessarily evolve, but changes. So in fact, our spiritual energy that gives us our will, our desires, etc reincarnates into another life, perhaps changed by it's previous experiences of being carnated into the physical world. Ultimately, I believe all of life is connected as one, but has it's own expression of the "The One".

Is this more or less what you were trying to communicate? The human verbal language can be a major barrier when trying to understand one another [t)]

Otherwise, I very much agree to your perception of astrology in your post.

QC~PLEASE forgive me! That was an embarrasing mistake![8)]

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by Kerrie
QC~PLEASE forgive me! That was an embarrasing mistake![8)]

Kerrie, thar jes ain't no mistakes. Its all in them thar stars!

I'm sorry I've not come any further with this topic. Its far too sunny and warm. Its as though we're in the house of the sun these days!!! Things have gone swimmingly.

I think we need all the info from western and chinese, egyptian and indian, mayan and inuit astrologies (etc...) to start crossreferencing regular physics and astrophysics with those claims and possible mechanisms involved with the above mentioned astrologies.

When this compilation starts to form we may find concrete correlations and we may not. We will most certainly be able to say we looked into it!

Thanks a billion, Carl.