Can Quantum Mechanics Explain the Effects of Astrology on Human Genetics?

[Kerrie]

anytime one tries to see astrology as a science will not see the evidence within the boundaries of science as the natal chart is as unique as each individual...astrology is more of an art...

 

[Phobos]

It would be refreshing if more astrologers had your sense about it Kerrie. There seems to be mostly astrological predictions & horoscopes out in the public eye.

Originally posted by Kerrie
anytime one tries to see astrology as a science will not see the evidence within the boundaries of science as the natal chart is as unique as each individual...astrology is more of an art...

Is it mostly subjective then? When drawing up a chart, how much of it is a standard protocol vs. interpretation?

 

[Kerrie]

Originally posted by Phobos
Is it mostly subjective then? When drawing up a chart, how much of it is a standard protocol vs. interpretation? [/B]

yes, the interpretations of the aspects and how they are reflective of human tendencies is subjective, but it is also regareded as an art...what is objective is the actual aspects of the planets to the Earth's ecliptic...for example when the moon is in opposition to the sun, it is literally a full moon, this can be interpretated as the ego and the spirit battling and struggling to balance one another...

 

[quantumcarl]

Just a bit neglectful of this thread... thank you all for keeping it going... Pelestration (sp) thanks for finding the old thread!

Kerrie says:

"anytime one tries to see astrology as a science will not see the evidence within the boundaries of science as the natal chart is as unique as each individual...astrology is more of an art..."

As far as I know science has no boundaries. What people call "metaphysics", by my definition, is simply a form of physics that has not been quantified, qualified, understood or correlated yet.

That's why I trust there will be a complete understanding of the mechanisms that govern astrological forecasts and diagnosises.

In fact, whomever or however astrology was formulated in the first place is the place where those equations and formulas for such a governance will be discovered. In fact there was a TLC or Discovery program called the Astrology of Atlantis aired a while ago. This, I believe, was research into the origin of the Constellations and not an expose of the intricated physics behind the subtle influences that the cosmos have on living, organic matter.

Thanks guys!

 

[Kerrie]

Carl~

I don't want to get off topic too much here, but modern science does seem to have boundaries...I find this a subject worthy of it's own topic in Philosophy...

 

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by Kerrie
Carl~

I don't want to get off topic too much here, but modern science does seem to have boundaries...I find this a subject worthy of it's own topic in Philosophy...

Yo, good philosophy topic.
I'll look for it!

 

[Brad_Ad23]

For the past 18 years my intro to Astronomy teacher has done a survey for all incoming people into his class. It starts out with him handing out astrological surveys by order of birth (i.e. he asks people to raise their hands if they were born between such and such, to correspond with a zodiac sign). The first part of the survey is about general traits, as based off of the Astrologer's Handbook. The 2nd part is specific daily predictions as from some newspaper astrologer. He has used the exact same survey all 18 years. After the surveys are answered by the students at home, he plots the data and we see a gaussian curve. Generall about 70% of the students respond favorably (i.e. a certain trait described fits them well) for the general trait, and about 35% for the specific event (graphed on another plot since it is two different thing). So, this seems to actually support astrology doesn't it? I mean if 70% of students felt something matched them then that is pretty significant statistically. Then he throws in the kicker. He randomly handed out the papers. There was no order and as a result only about 1 in 12 actually got the correct zodiac paper. This then suggests that people will generally identify with positive traits, and the things made are vague enough to apply to anyone. Hence, astrology is nothing more than a collection of psychological tendancies of people.

As it is, my professor is having me and another student research previous studies and eventually we are going to compile all 18 years worth of data and use it to demonstrate this.

 

[pelastration]

Brad,

Nice effort of that teacher. He spent 18 years just to prove his own case. No problem.
He tries to disprove something with an analysis system based on a rate of 1/12, while the real astrology has about 10! combinations. 1/10!
I sure you will find the data he wants to find. Great job. 18 years lost! :/

Murphy's Technology Law #2:
Logic is a systematic method of coming to the wrong conclusion with confidence.

I like these thoughts, since they show a little bit of relativity:

Murphy's Technology Laws
1._____Logic is a systematic method of coming to the wrong conclusion with confidence.
2._____Whenever a system becomes completely defined, some damn fool discovers something which either abolishes the system or expands it beyond recognition.
3. Technology is dominated by those who manage what they do not understand.
4.____If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker that came along would destroy civilization.
5._____The attention span of a computer is only as long as it electrical cord.
6._____An expert is one who knows more and more about less and less until he knows absolutely everything about nothing.
7.____Nothing ever gets built on schedule or within budget.
8.____All's well that ends.
9.____To err is human, but to really foul things up requires a computer.
10._We don't know one millionth of one percent about anything.
11._Any given program, when running, is obsolete.
12.__Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
13.__A computer makes as many mistakes in two seconds as 20 men working 20 years make.
14.__To spot the expert, pick the one who predicts the job will take the longest and cost the most.
15.__A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.
16.___If mathematically you end up with the incorrect answer, try multiplying by the page number.
17. ... more on http://www.geocities.com/murphylawsite/technology_laws.html

 

[Brad_Ad23]

Brad,

Nice effort of that teacher. He spent 18 years just to prove his own case. No problem.
He tries to disprove something with an analysis system based on a rate of 1/12, while the real astrology has about 10! combinations. 1/10!
I sure you will find the data he wants to find. Great job. 18 years lost! :/

No, not quite. Only 1 in 12 people actually got the astrological survey that they should have. Since there was a high correlation of success for people that got false ones, this implies that astrology is a bunch of bull.

 

[pelastration]

Brad,

have you ever seen a 'real' personal horoscope?

Dirk

 

[Brad_Ad23]

Yes, and they are very complicated. However, you are missing the point of what I am saying. The part about a newspaper horoscope is irrelevant, just an extra bit of pudding.

The meat and potatos of the experiment was taken out of the Astrologer's Handbook, and that was the general characteristics of each of the zodiac signs (as per the book). The correlation was 70% right there, despite people receiving 11 times out of 12 the incorrect general traits paper.

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Originally posted by hypnagogue
T Professional astrologers do not hold with theories of celestial influence. Instead, the modern astrologer conceives of the heavens and the Earth as united, interpenetrating, and sharing a common space and time. The great cosmic or celestial events happening around and beyond the Earth (eclipses, lineups, and so on) are not seen as CAUSING events to occur on Earth, but as great signatures of events ALSO happening here on Earth. In other words, there is no "cause" in the heavens followed by an "effect" here on Earth. Instead, both planetary and earthly events happen simultaneously and are mutually reflective. Neither is the other here on the Earth below. While astrologers don't feel that heavenly events are the cause of events here on Earth, they do feel that specific heavenly events are enacted here on the Earth-- at the same moment. In other words, there is only one grand "play." The great drama enacted in the sky is also acted out (in exact detail) here on Earth in the same instant. Another way to say this is that the Earth is part of the cosmos and shares in that cosmic moment.
------------------------------------------

Now, what I find interesting about this is that this idea of acausal, meaningful relationships is very much in the spirit of Carl Jung's theory of synchronicity. Jung observed the existence of synchronistic events, which are acausally related and highly meaningful. Typically a synchronicity involves an individual's internal mental state being mirrored by an independent, acausally related external event, hence the synchronicity's meaningful nature. I am currently reading a book which postulates that such correspondances are indications of an underlying symmetry to existence. If nothing else, the fact that Jung came up with his theory based on real life observations (presumably) independently of any inspiration from astrology, and that his theory nontheless characterizes the conceptual framework behind astrology very well, is a provocative connection. Thoughts?

ok, let me see if I got this straight. A eclipse doesn't cause an event on Earth it's just a reflection of that event (and it must be an rare event since eclipses are rare). But we can predict eclipses (and a bunch of other astronomical events). So let's say we know an solar eclipse will happen on 19.04.2004. Doesn't that mean that an event on Earth will reflect that eclipse? So we can predict that an rare event will happen on that date true?
Another question. What event was reflected by the eclipse on 21.06.2001? Was it common for all the people on Earth, or was it personal for each?

 

[PsYcHo_FiSh]

One thing about astrology is its kind of metaphysic. I mean, there may be something to it but its kind of inconsistent. Personally, I believe in something a little more beyond what science accepts today. However, first thing we would have to do (IMO) is determine what affects does astrology have on people's before even if they aren't students of astrology. If we can successfully predict people's traits with astrology I think we are in bidness. But, that's not always the case and you guys know that. I'd like to believe astrology holds credence though.

There is a lot of stuff from ancient times that actually makes sense. Its just the modern scientific method has dwarfed and dismissed many things. Namely, Chinese medicine. Some of it is bull crap imo but if you put certain chemicals together from plants you have a pharmaceutical. The point being, the experience and wisdom of our ancestors needs to be respected and looked into logically.

Anyways, a science minded fellow might tell you that not even the outer planets have much of any affect on you. So, there is one thought. I don't know the truth.

Anyways, I think there is a degree of free will. If there isn't, the concept still has a use to us humans. But we do make decisions independent of everything we were raised around. Its not all stimulus input produces exactly what you want. That's a bunch of marxist bull.

I guess you could say, humans are the product of the random, fate and their own experiences. But name the force that is compelling me to write this. I bet you can't right off the top of your head. Takes time to think about thinking don't it? Meanwhile, aren't you choosing to go down this line of thought? :D

So let's say we know an solar eclipse will happen on 19.04.2004. Doesn't that mean that an event on Earth will reflect that eclipse? So we can predict that an rare event will happen on that date true?

Well, predictably when a rare event occurs humans act accordingly. Anyways, we see patterns, rather we look for patterns, all to well. That is why we developed the scientific method, to iron out patterns that are merely clutter. However, it is useless without imagination and an open mind. For, where would we find the inspiration to go on wihout the two?

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

This thread seems to have died but I'll throw in my own two cents any way. It seems to me as though the info that cotterrel sites doesn't quite pan out as he explains it and is mainly just a hodge podge of research from unrelated groups and people. Most of it is even out of date as well the most recent bit I found in referance to the astrology subject being from 1984. One other thing that gives me pause concerning his theories is that I heard him in an interview claiming that the majority of the worlds billiard balls are made from the ivory tusks of frozen wolly mammoths since these frozen specimens are appearantly a dime a dozen.