Scientist wanting to understand astrology

Hi all. This is my first post and before I say anything else I wish to make it clear I wish no offense to anybody.
I am a keen Astronomer and obviously our two studies have a certain overlap, however as I'm sure your aware astronomers often disregard astrology as nonsense, a pseudoscience. I like to think of myself as more own minded then that and will not believe something just because someone else told me so. That is why I am here-to try and understand and find out what evidence their is that astrology is real and true and deserves to be followed. I doubt you guys are idiots so what is it that gives you such faith in astrology and can this study be proved to be genuine.
Again I am not intending to cause offence I just wish to understand before I either follow astrology it dismiss it.

There hasn't been many studies into astrology but if there were it would be very easy to prove significant patterns if using large sample sizes and looking for the right thing.

Michel Gauquelin, a french statistician, did some research in the 50's and found "the Mars effect":

"The Mars effect is a purported statistical correlation between athletic eminence and the position of the planet Mars relative to the horizon at time and place of birth."

Skeptics will always try and explain away any positive results in these fields, this is explained perfectly in this video by statistician Professor Dean Radin called Science and the Taboo of Psi. It's a Google Tech Talk, not directly related to astrology but it gives you an understanding of how evidence of this nature is handled by the mainstream establishment.

Personally, I think it would be very easy to conclusively scientifically prove astrology by looking at correlations between the charts of married couples, since there are configurations that come up time and time again.

And also we would see conclusive patterns if we had software to analyse facial characteristics vs placements in the charts of individuals. I've taught a friend how to recognise certain astrological signs in people's faces, he knows absolutely nothing about astrology but he knows very many people and he now is very accurate at determining someone's sign by just identifying these patterns. Software looking at this with very large samples would give us irrefutable proof. But I can't see anyone doing this any time soon.

Astrology is a science, and just like any other science, it cannot be a perfect one. No one questions medicine, even though doctors are often wrong. We all know by experience that medicine works sometimes, sometimes it doesn't. It's true though we often condemn the Doctor for his error in judgement. Yet we don't condemn science and medicine as a whole do we?

If you really want the answer to your inquiry into the validity of astrology you will take it up for yourself. You don't need any psychic abilities. Just an open mind.

Tycho Brahe and Johannes Kepler
Isn't kepler considered the father of astronomy? If I'm not mistaken he came up with the computations of planet orbits(?) to perfect his knowledge and workings of astrology. He is quoted as saying
"Astrology has compelled my unwilling belief"

Physics, like chemistry and biology, work with corresponding cycles and "osmosis" of vaue from cycle to cycle.
There is no indication as to how gravity works, what "mediates" it. It is a simple correspondence theory, no proper causal logic.
The same goes for astrology.
We do not know what causes the correspondence, like we do not know what causes one body to be attracted to another. We just know, through empirical practice, that they do, and with consistency.
Astrology is correspondence theory, not causal theory.
All that can be done to understand if it works, is to do years of empirical research.
And I guarantee that the results will surpass your wildest imagination.
It's a bit scary.
I'm an astronomer of origin as well. I first hated the fact that astrology seems to apply. Ive gotten used to it though, somewhat - though it still baffles me how accurate it, without exception, turns out to be.

Some months ago I made a rather sloppy attempt at linking astrology to science, it may still contain some value for you.
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=99285

The Myers-Briggs was developed loosely using Astrology. The current assessment differs somewhat to what Carl Jung had laid the foundation for, but the basic principles use characteristics associated with the 4 elements. Jung was also a proponent of Astrology and this caused a bit of a feud between him and Freud.

Obviously, new things have been discovered since then, but Astrology snuck its way into the sciences.

As far as believing a lot of it comes down to observation. My parents are both big into Astrology and since I was little I would watch my parents observe people and match their personality with their sign with reasonable accuracy. Sooooo for it isn't really a belief it's something I've seen and continue to see in practice and is as real and prevalent the oxygen that I breathe.

I just encourage through research.

Yes, thorough research is, like with all science, the only way of verification. It's typical though that most of today's "skeptics" are not skeptical of their own convictions, and thus disregard what they don't understand without investigating.

Myer Briggs is cute but not science, has nothing to do with scientific method, one cannot verify factually whether a person is this or that type. The types have no root in physical, traceable ground. Astrology simply maps progressions that actually, physically are happening. It's very easy to verify.

blacksun? said:

Yes, thorough research is, like with all science, the only way of verification.
It's typical though that most of today's "skeptics" are not skeptical of their own convictions,
and thus disregard what they don't understand without investigating.

Myer Briggs is cute but not science,
has nothing to do with scientific method,
one cannot verify factually whether a person is this or that type.
The types have no root in physical, traceable ground.
Astrology simply maps progressions that actually, physically are happening.
It's very easy to verify.

Click to expand...

the MAYANS
are famed for their noting of the transits of VENUS
long before COPERNICUS

Popeye85 said:

Hi all. This is my first post and before I say anything else I wish to make it clear I wish no offense to anybody.
I am a keen Astronomer and obviously our two studies have a certain overlap, however as I'm sure your aware astronomers often disregard astrology as nonsense, a pseudoscience. I like to think of myself as more own minded then that and will not believe something just because someone else told me so. That is why I am here-to try and understand and find out what evidence their is that astrology is real and true and deserves to be followed. I doubt you guys are idiots so what is it that gives you such faith in astrology and can this study be proved to be genuine.
Again I am not intending to cause offence I just wish to understand before I either follow astrology it dismiss it.

Click to expand...

hi popeye

my first response is that there is indeed an underlying prejudice in the scientific/astronomical establishment against astrology as most would agree. there fore the deductive plane of anaylisis is not level to gebin with and in fact astronomy as such deceives it's very description of astrology. what I am rambling about is that scientist will always talk about ancient astronomers. this not only is a misnomer but it is a factual lie. there were no ancient astronomers, they were all astrologers and in fact the word Astronomer, imply some one whose profession is astronomy never existed until the 18th century. the first astronomer, meaning someone who makes their living with astronomy was sir William Herschel. he in fact was hired by the Crown to measure all thing astronomical. he was the first. newton was an astrologer/alchemist.

of course the ancient astrologers used astronomical calculations to arrive at there interpretations... but they were not paid to make astronomical calculations... they were paid to make predictions essentially.
there was no profession of individuals who went around selling their services a astronomical calculators. all astrologers had to now the mathematics to begin with.

this may seem a picayune point but it is in fact not. scientist and astronomers place themselves on a pedestal or truth yet they will engage in blatant lies when a fact that undermines their superiority is issued.

so I am not trying to be offensive to you. but you must realize you have a preexistent prejudice, if subconscious, to believing astrology.

so I have to refer back to the great astrologer sir issac newton...when sir Edmond Halley challenged newton over his belief in astrology.. Newton reply was a applicable then as it is now...:Sir, I have studied the subject and you have not"

so my suggestion to you Popeye is instead of trying to find reasons from other to believe or reject.. that you buy some good astrology books and study the science yourself.....
for intimately as quantum mechanics has proven... your frame of mind will condition the expression of the reality you investigate .

rahu

detectahead said:

Tycho Brahe and Johannes Kepler
Isn't kepler considered the father of astronomy? If I'm not mistaken he came up with the computations of planet orbits(?) to perfect his knowledge and workings of astrology. He is quoted as saying
"Astrology has compelled my unwilling belief"

Click to expand...

kepler is not the father of astronomy per se.. astronomy are the calculations to describe the movements of the celestial sphere
Claudius Ptolemy recorded the existing astronomical calculation of later antiquity/

kepler discovered the mathematical calculation of the orbit of the planets when he realize the orbits were not ciricular but elliptical.

copenicus had first described the planets going around the sun a hundred years before kepler, but he thought the orbits were ciricular as a consequence his theory was not accepted for the simple reason the planets movements did not match his calculation . astrologers system of epi cycles were still in use as they were almost
exactly correct

kepler did discover th keplerian aspects

Keplerian Aspects were developed by Kepler as an extension of the Major aspects defined by Ptolemy. He believed that there were only about 8 different aspects that would have any significance in astrological work. These are named the Keplerian Aspects and are a group of angles called 'quintiles'. They are quincunx, the decile and semi-decile, the quintile and the bi-quintile and the quindecile.

but interestingly when NASA launches a satellite orspace vehicle , they use formulas based on kepler's formula's... not newton's fromulas. the genius of kepler is that his equations are nearly perfect and the concept of gravity did not exist and calculus did not exist when he calcutated his equations

rahu

If you looked up to see who is given the title"father of astronomy" what name would you find rahu?
And I didn't say he WAS the father, I said isn't he considered the father

---- so I have to refer back to the great astrologer sir issac newton...when sir Edmond Halley challenged newton over his belief in astrology.. Newton reply was a applicable then as it is now...:Sir, I have studied the subject and you have not" ----



Nice. Do you have a source?
I'd like to be able to present this to some philosophers.

The father of astrology is the Sun. The light in mans eye that gives birth to all human thoughts, methods and circumstances. Saturn and Moon are its mothers, the guardians of the cycles. Mind is its child. Science originated with astrology, the diligent observation of processes great and small, above and below. The conclusion that as above, so is below.

Fractals are the scientific language for astro-logic.

Once you've noticed astrology's accuracy, there is no turning back, like you can't unbelieve in gravity. Maybe that's why the resistance: people don't want to know their natures.

Maybe.

blacksun? said:

---- so I have to refer back to the great astrologer sir issac newton...when sir Edmond Halley challenged newton over his belief in astrology.. Newton reply was a applicable then as it is now...:Sir, I have studied the subject and you have not" ----



Nice. Do you have a source?
I'd like to be able to present this to some philosophers.

The father of astrology is the Sun. The light in mans eye that gives birth to all human thoughts, methods and circumstances. Saturn and Moon are its mothers, the guardians of the cycles. Mind is its child. Science originated with astrology, the diligent observation of processes great and small, above and below. The conclusion that as above, so is below.

Fractals are the scientific language for astro-logic.

Once you've noticed astrology's accuracy, there is no turning back, like you can't unbelieve in gravity. Maybe that's why the resistance: people don't want to know their natures.

Maybe.

Click to expand...

i first read this quote in llywelyn's a to z delineator
http://www.alibris.com/A-to-Z-Horoscope-Maker-and-Delineator-Llewellyn-George/book/10208910

this was one of the best compendiums for astrology ever.if you get a copy make sure it published before the middle 70's. this book was packed full of little remembered or mentioned astrological trivia in addition to standard chart casting and interpretation.it was like a combination of the last 100 years of arcane astrological beliefs. but around 1980 with the infusion of humanist astrological psychobabble, they published issued a "new edition" which essentially gutted all the arcane trivia and presented a slightly more "modern" volume which is worthless as many better books exist now. but it was packed with astrological stories and trivia that I had never read and have never read since. newton's quote was omitted in the "new version"

rahu

blacksun? said:

---- so I have to refer back to the great astrologer sir issac newton...when sir Edmond Halley challenged newton over his belief in astrology.. Newton reply was a applicable then as it is now...:Sir, I have studied the subject and you have not" ----



Nice. Do you have a source?
I'd like to be able to present this to some philosophers.

The father of astrology is the Sun. The light in mans eye that gives birth to all human thoughts, methods and circumstances. Saturn and Moon are its mothers, the guardians of the cycles. Mind is its child. Science originated with astrology, the diligent observation of processes great and small, above and below. The conclusion that as above, so is below.

Fractals are the scientific language for astro-logic.

Once you've noticed astrology's accuracy, there is no turning back, like you can't unbelieve in gravity. Maybe that's why the resistance: people don't want to know their natures.

Maybe.

Click to expand...

there is no turning back, like you can't unbelieve in gravity.

this is actually untrue as the equation for gravity is a quadratic equation .
the solution has two asnwers positive and negative accelerations. newton chose the negative 32/ft per second squared because obviously the apple fell down from the tree. but mathematically you can see gravity as a postive expansive accelerating force, and in fact in the 18th century some"s scientists put forth this theory.
.

very simple the reason a apple "seems to fall to the earth is that the gravity of the earth and stronger that the gravity of the apple so the apple appears to fall to the earth.

but looking at it as a positive force the more mass a object has the quicker it expands so the earth in this perspective is actually expanding faster that the apple with its lower mass. so it seems that the apple is falling.

and then one must realize that the deflection of light by a the gravity of a planet or star is exactly like the deflection of light in a electromagnetic field. their is in fact no way to distinguish whether light is deflect by a electromagnetic field or a gravitational filed.

the problem with the expanding gravitational field was that you need more the 4 dimensions of time and space to describe the expansion of reality. but within the last 20 years this problem has been theoretically been overcome because of string theory which hold the universe is made up of innately small vibrating threads of energy and this theory also presupposed there are 10 dimensions of time and space.
rahu

f=m.a


that's the type of thing we are talking about.


or: action = -reaction.

And that, my friend, is just an axiom of measurement and definition. It's not a philosophy as to what gravity "really is".
It's a measurement of things that really happen and a definition of them in consistent terms. Like astrology is.

Hi !
As per ancient Indian texts, Raavanan ( of Ramayana) was the greatest astronomer/astrologer of all times.Raa Vaanan means 'The man of the night sky'in the ancient language of Tamil, which has links to Greek. As Rahu mentioned, there was no branch of science called 'astronomy' then. It was all astrology. Precise planetary positions are mentioned in both the Ramayana and Mahabharata, but they are described in the language of 'astrology' and not astronomy.

I have llywelyns a to z older edition. It's key words for planets is indispensable!

blacksun? said:

f=m.a


that's the type of thing we are talking about.


or: action = -reaction.

And that, my friend, is just an axiom of measurement and definition. It's not a philosophy as to what gravity "really is".
It's a measurement of things that really happen and a definition of them in consistent terms. Like astrology is.

Click to expand...

well even f=ma may have been shown to be suspect

http://www.sciencealert.com/indepen...-that-the-impossible-em-drive-produces-thrust
Over the past year, there's been a whole lot of excitement about the electromagnetic propulsion drive, or EM Drive - a scientifically impossible engine that's defied pretty much everyone's expectations by continuing to stand up to experimental scrutiny.
The drive is so exciting because it produces huge amounts of propulsion that could theoretically blast us to Mars in just 70 days, without the need for heavy and expensive rocket fuel. Instead, it's apparently propelled forward by microwaves bouncing back and forth inside an enclosed chamber, and this is what makes the drive so powerful, and at the same time so controversial.


As efficient as this type of propulsion may sound, it defies one of the fundamental concepts of physics - the conservation of momentum, which states that for something to be propelled forward, some kind of propellant needs to be pushed out in the opposite direction.
For that reason, the drive was widely laughed at and ignored when it was invented by English researcher Roger Shawyer in the early 2000s. But a few years later, a team of Chinese scientists decided to build their own version, and to everyone's surprise, it actually worked. Then an American inventor did the same, and convinced NASA's Eagleworks Laboratories, headed up by Harold 'Sonny' White, to test it.

we base our philosophy on the standard model which is essentially the same construct Aristotle formulated. which basically make matter/atoms the building block of the universe.

but quantum theory has proven that matter is an illusion. matter is a intersection/node of quantum frequencies. so though the standard model is simply wrong, philosophers still base their concepts of reality as it the stand model is the law of the universe.

rahu

Also, physically viewing external galactic objects is astronomy. Wheras viewing them internally within oneself is astrology. My internal universe is as true as your external one.

blacksun? said:

Yes, thorough research is, like with all science, the only way of verification. It's typical though that most of today's "skeptics" are not skeptical of their own convictions, and thus disregard what they don't understand without investigating.

Myer Briggs is cute but not science, has nothing to do with scientific method, one cannot verify factually whether a person is this or that type. The types have no root in physical, traceable ground. Astrology simply maps progressions that actually, physically are happening. It's very easy to verify.

Click to expand...

The Myers Briggs itself may not be considered science, but it is the result of a scientific field. I agree with your point "the types have no root in physical, traceable ground." The point I was trying to make was that the astrological archetypes placed with the signs as well as the elements were influential in a scientific field of study.