An astrologer talked about famosity in my chart

In april 2010 i had a consult with a vedic astrologer here in Holland. She mentioned something like there is a chance on famosity. I think this had something to do with mercury in my chart. She did however eventually relate this to having a store, but i don't think that is my way to go. She also said i may meet my lover there. With this, i think she was not really talking about 2010, but some further in the future, if i am correct.

Although i have no intentions for a store, i do something with writing, which could relate to Mercury, i think. My guru is playing an important role in my writings and you could say that there's a secret in it that i mostly kept for myself over the years. Soon i might share it with a few more people, but if it has to become public, i don't know. Maybe in a later stage.
I know also that mercury is placed in the 9th house, which is about guru's. Could someone here mention more specifically what she must have seen in my chart? Some position or so. About Vedic aspects i don't know, but i may be able to get (partially) some own interpretation, by knowing 1 or more other details. I don't know which calculations she used, but my mother may thought of Raman, although she might not have been sure about it.

Here are my birth details:

Country: Holland/Netherlands
City: Harlingen
Date: 05-05-1983
Time: 18:00:50 could be used, otherwise 18:01.

What is famosity?

It seems i took the wrong word for it. I meant "becoming famous".

Thank you for looking at my chart
It seems that transit Neptune in 5 has something to do with my recent change, last month. I actually waited for a man for years (long story), but didn't know that he was not the right one for me. Just some weeks ago i heard he is married with someone else. I accepted that i have been wrong and will learn the lesson from it. I analysed my situation and things seemed to become clear to me, why i went wrong. Now i'm taking a step further in my development.

About my writings. These are about my personal life, spiritual path, and the guidance of my guru, where dreams play an important role.

Thanks

theres 315,278,568 in the united states.

these people are calculating around 10-15 k people that are famous.

http://deadspin.com/5574741/how-many-famous-people-are-there-on-earth

around 7,000 of the stable positions of fame instead of fleeting fame for a book or historical fame for a work are basically "guiding lights" but "empty substance". which means that to be famous is a job itself which produces some "generation" except that this generation is supposed to be a closure for a real movement. being famous is really a representation of a movement since people have to understand it as such.

actors represent cultural reality or human fantasy, but they are actually not doing the substance of their work.

i think the better option for fame that is more enduring is creating something that becomes popular from your own unforeseen belief. where its both generating practical utility as well as changing the system of values.

people that create something of value dont have time to be going here and there to get on the screens. they might show up one day and talk about it.

many of the famous things wash away which is incredibly sad when all that funding and all that energy is spent on turning a dime. instead of making a lasting impression materially.

two of the most plausible categories are either to be a screen-hoarder or control others to do your work. yet none of these things are where the real innovation or creativity spring from.

that is why i think its better to make middle-class or upper-middle class money doing something that is bigger than the money.

fame is similar to the hippocampus in a brain. it has the most neuronal population upregulation. having the fastest synaptic plasticity (dentritic spines reconnecting to other ones).

when the hippocampus is filled with trash the entire brain becomes retarded since its the short term memory.

i actually think it should be the exact opposite. the human condition is dull, always tired, drone-like. it has no match at all to the action in movies. when people should not be sitting down.

so in effect fame is not a self-to-self correlation of a movement, but rather the embezzlement of the repressed yearnings of society itself.

if you want to see the life of an intellectual that becomes famous look at slajov zizek's later works. its all poppy dan brown style now. cause he has no time to think.

but i think that people should follow their chart in the conditions as is. except for things that help instead of impede.

will be somewhat famous in old age but not a huge celebrity
3 planets Rx are causing too much confusion and conflicts