Does astrology work?

[3113]

Oh, and 3113- I'm an Aries

Darkside Zodiac says you are:

a loud, overconfident, aggressive thug with way too many Y chromosomes and a will of titanium clad granite.

Damn! Spot on for you Stella

Oh, and as for toothpaste:

After a five-minute rnt in the bathroom when you throw everything out of the window looking for your tube of toothpaste, you finally find it in the laundry basket. You hammer it flat with your bare hands.

I love this book!

 

[sweetnpetite]

I kind of figured you for a pisces. Darkside Zodiac has this to say about you and toothpaste:


Accurate?

I"m a pisces and I always worry that I'm going to squeeze the wrong tube! lol. Seriously.

 

[sweetnpetite]

science smyance

science doesn't have all of the answers

in fact, mostly what it has are a bunch of always changing theories

science is good for some things but just because science can't prove it doesn't make it "bunk"

I don't think alchemy is bunk either... oversimplified and misunderstood in common knowlege, like most things, but not bunk.

 

[Vermilion]

On the "yes" side, there is an argument that if kids are born at a certain time of year (closer or father from the sun), that they turn out a certain way. That's iffy, but there *might* be someting to it. That is, shorter days might make for a Capricorn, longer days a Gemini.

True or not I happen to fit the typical Arien characteristics scarily accurately.
x
V

 

[rachlou]

Well i'm an Aquarian and according to Darkest Zodiac i'm just waiting for the Mother Ship to beam me back up...

Is there anyone out there?!

 

[Vermilion]

Well i'm an Aquarian and according to Darkest Zodiac i'm just waiting for the Mother Ship to beam me back up...

Is there anyone out there?!

Hee hee
I am, but I don't think I'm what you're looking for sweetie !
x
V

 

[rgraham666]

The idea about gravitational pull of planets and so forth is bunk - the person delivering the baby exerts more gravitational pull than any planet.

Having said that, I do know for a fact that Scorpios are usually evil.

Yes, we are.

 

[rachlou]

Hee hee
I am, but I don't think I'm what you're looking for sweetie !
x
V

Hey put a silver space suit on and i'll consider it!

 

[Frank Noir]

I mean, how is it possible to tell someone's future by looking at the movements of planets?

Short and cynical answer: It isn't.

Open-minded answer: If it is, we don't know why.
(The latter is possible: People used electricity for ages without knowing exactly how it worked)

I know people who have had convincing experiences with horoscopes. But as long as I haven't found scientific evidence, I completely and utterly refuse to believe in it myself.

 

[Vermilion]

Hey put a silver space suit on and i'll consider it!

I've got tin foil, sticky back plastic and some empty cardboard toilet-roll holders.

What can we make with that kids?
x
V

 

[R. Richard]

Originally Posted by R. Richard
Science is based upon cause and effect.

We then have the question of how the positions of the planets can be a cause. The answer is really quite simple. The sun is not a solid but, in effect, a ball of plasma. The gravitational effects of the planets on the sun will cause the solar radiation to change in subtle ways. You now have a cause.

Can someone trace the cause and predict the effect? I have no idea. However, there is a possible basis for astrology.

Liar:
So we should instead log sun spot activity for our birthdays. Since that causes variations in solar radiation that makes planetary involvement look like a fart in a hurricane.

Sun spot/solar flare activity is a relatively short term phenomenon. The variation in solar radiation due to planetary activity is [more or less, in a human time frame] constant and cyclical.

Huckleman2000:
The idea about gravitational pull of planets and so forth is bunk - the person delivering the baby exerts more gravitational pull than any planet.

Earth Mass: 6,600,000,000,000,000,000,000 (6.6 sextillion) short tons or (6.0 sextillion metric tons)
Earth to Sun Distance = 92,955,820.5 miles or (149,597,892 kilometers).
The gravitational force of the Sun causes the Earth to orbit the Sun at a distance of some 149,597,892 kilometers. The mass of the Earth is some 6 sextillion metric tons. I would say that the force that the Sun exerts, necessary to cause the Earth to orbit the Sun, is somewhat more than the force normally used to deliver a baby. The Sun is, in effect, a ball of plasma. The shifting, cyclical force that the Sun exerts to cause not just the Earth but all of the planets to orbit the Sun [Wazzat, Huckleman? Yes, that includes dwarf planets.] would be considerable and again more than the force necessary to deliver a baby or even several babies [Yes Huckleman, even elephant babies.] Such a force could reasonably be expected to have effects on the Sun and such effects would probably include varying the amount and perhaps even the specific types of solar radiation.

[Yes, I know that the solar system will eventually run down. To quote from Wikipedia: As Earth's Sun has a mass of one solar mass, it is expected to become a red giant in about five billion years. It will become sufficiently large enough to engulf the current orbits of some of the solar system's inner planets, including Earth. However, the gravitational pull of the Sun will have weakened by then due to its loss of mass, and all planets but Mercury will escape to a wider orbit. On the other hand, Earth's ability to carry life will be gone before the Sun gets brighter as its hydrogen supply becomes depleted. The extra solar energy will cause the oceans to evaporate to space, causing the Earth's atmosphere to become similar to Venus'. However, none of us will be around to see the Sun’s big light show.]

 

[SimonBrooke]

Generally, the math required to do an astrological chart is not available to the practicioners. What you get is an approximation based on plane geometry. The problem is, the orbits of the planets are neither quite planer nor as regular as the geometry assumes. The equations are much more complex.

While that's true, it's also beside the point. The movements of the celestial bodies follow orbits which are continuous and predictable. So if they predict how our lives work, then the detailed history of our lives was already established before the planets were set in motion.

If astrology does work, then your life is predetermined. Your every movement, the every thought of your brain - which key on the keyboard you will strike next - were all determined before the earth solidified, probably before the Universe was created.

That may be true, or it may not; there is no way of knowing. But if it is true we might as well all go out and cut our throats, because there is no possibility of freedom for any of us. Except, of course, that if it is true, we don't even have the freedom to cut our throats - unless the stars predict we will.

 

[SimonBrooke]

Earth Mass: 6,600,000,000,000,000,000,000 (6.6 sextillion) short tons or (6.0 sextillion metric tons)
Earth to Sun Distance = 92,955,820.5 miles or (149,597,892 kilometers).
The gravitational force of the Sun causes the Earth to orbit the Sun at a distance of some 149,597,892 kilometers. The mass of the Earth is some 6 sextillion metric tons. I would say that the force that the Sun exerts, necessary to cause the Earth to orbit the Sun, is somewhat more than the force normally used to deliver a baby.

Errrmmmm.... phenomenal exercise in missing the point. The sun is, as you say, very very large and very very heavy, and also very very far away. The midwife is relatively small and relatively light, but she's very very close by. The gravity exerted by one body on another is a function of the mass and the cube of the distance. Regardless of whether the midwife is actually touching the baby or not, the gravitational attraction between the baby and the midwife is greater than the gravitational attraction between the baby and the sun, because the sun is a long, long way away.

OK?

 

[SimonBrooke]

Once upon a time - a very long time ago - a young lady who was trying to get me into her bed put a lot of effort into plotting my horoscope properly, with charts and ephemera and all the stuff. I was quite impressed by the amount of work she put into it. I sat in a corner of the room reading a book and watching her. After about three hours she looked up and said 'Ah! It says here you don't believe in horoscopes'.

So they are right sometimes.

She never did get me into her bed, though.

 

[Pure]

simon, i wouldn't agree with that analysis at all, as to the consequences of 'pre determination.' it's a view held by those of several religions, including some Xtians. one's life is written down "in the book" in every detail, including the time and manner of death.

your conclusion is dubious, as you yourself agree in the final sentence: whether one's thought of cutting one's throat would lead to the successful act is also predetermined.

SBIf astrology does work, then your life is predetermined. Your every movement, the every thought of your brain - which key on the keyboard you will strike next - were all determined before the earth solidified, probably before the Universe was created.

That may be true, or it may not; there is no way of knowing. But if it is true we might as well all go out and cut our throats, because there is no possibility of freedom for any of us. Except, of course, that if it is true, we don't even have the freedom to cut our throats - unless the stars predict we will.

P: within our perspective, some efforts seem to work; hard study gets lots of people through university. of course 'legacy kids,' there because dad is an alum, simply need to coast to the BA, or even, in a well known case, to a Harvard MBA, the only one in Crawford Texas.

i hold that 'predetermination' would be of absolutely NO CONSEQUENCE. suppose you're being mugged: do you resist? it would be an error not to, because one is thinking 'it's all predetermined.' FOR the consequences of resistance, i.e. success or worse mugging, are also predetermined. So you might as well resist, if it looks like it would work.

Same for 'courting.' Whether you win the lady may be predetermined, but that's no reason to give up. Your efforts to win her, *crowned by success* may be part of the book's account.

---
your fundamental premise is also faulty in that you saddle "astrology" with a kind of 'hard determinism' {equated with predetermination} many astrologers in fact are 'soft determinists.' the "influence" of the planets *inclines* but does not compel.
----

this argument is very tired:
SBErrrmmmm.... phenomenal exercise in missing the point. The sun is, as you say, very very large and very very heavy, and also very very far away. The midwife is relatively small and relatively light, but she's very very close by. The gravity exerted by one body on another is a function of the mass and the cube of the distance. Regardless of whether the midwife is actually touching the baby or not, the gravitational attraction between the baby and the midwife is greater than the gravitational attraction between the baby and the sun, because the sun is a long, long way away.

P: this saddles "astrology" with the position that it "works" because of the sun's gravity.

many astrologers are fond of the "clock" analogy.
the planetary positions (including the Sun's) are like the positions of clock hands. these function as indicators [of a causal network]: i.e., when the clock's hands say 8am, you go to work. that is not because the hands, in the 8am position exert direct causal influence.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Well i'm an Aquarian and according to Darkest Zodiac i'm just waiting for the Mother Ship to beam me back up...

Is there anyone out there?!

Ahhh! That explains it.

<---Aquarius

Moon in cancer, libra rising...

 

[kendo1]

.....

 

[blackhaus7]

I always read my horoscope from the previous day to see how accurate it actually was. Misses most days. But I am who I am. Leo describes me quite well. And the fire, earth, air and water signs are reasonable, within limits. I'm fire, I dated a water and realized it would never work, so maybe there's something to that. The rest.........

 

[Huckleman2000]

Earth Mass: 6,600,000,000,000,000,000,000 (6.6 sextillion) short tons or (6.0 sextillion metric tons)
Earth to Sun Distance = 92,955,820.5 miles or (149,597,892 kilometers).
The gravitational force of the Sun causes the Earth to orbit the Sun at a distance of some 149,597,892 kilometers. The mass of the Earth is some 6 sextillion metric tons. I would say that the force that the Sun exerts, necessary to cause the Earth to orbit the Sun, is somewhat more than the force normally used to deliver a baby. The Sun is, in effect, a ball of plasma. The shifting, cyclical force that the Sun exerts to cause not just the Earth but all of the planets to orbit the Sun [Wazzat, Huckleman? Yes, that includes dwarf planets.] would be considerable and again more than the force necessary to deliver a baby or even several babies [Yes Huckleman, even elephant babies.] Such a force could reasonably be expected to have effects on the Sun and such effects would probably include varying the amount and perhaps even the specific types of solar radiation.

As SimonBrooke rightfully pointed out, gravitational force is a function of both mass and distance.


I'm also an Aquarius, I think in Sun, Moon, and Rising signs.

 

[Huckleman2000]

=P: this saddles "astrology" with the position that it "works" because of the sun's gravity.

many astrologers are fond of the "clock" analogy.
the planetary positions (including the Sun's) are like the positions of clock hands. these function as indicators [of a causal network]: i.e., when the clock's hands say 8am, you go to work. that is not because the hands, in the 8am position exert direct causal influence.

I (nor Simon) didn't saddle astrology with that position - That's a common 'scientific' justification for it. eg, that the relatively constant or predictable positions of the planets over the course of gestation influence the development of the fetus, giving rise to personality traits.

 

[Pure]

as i said, direct "influence", e.g., "rays" coming from the planets is a kind of ancient view. it's unnecessary for astrology. some kind of synchronism will suffice, as the clock analogy indicates.

eg, that the relatively constant or predictable positions of the planets over the course of gestation influence the development of the fetus, giving rise to personality traits.

i'm not sure that's a common position, but it sounds dubious. if there were a moment of "influence", chances are it would be at conception, where genetic makeup is determined. the "course of gestation" is not necessarily the key to temperament.

in any case, the simplistic theories of some astrologers, esp. the ancients, should not be the test; the physicians too, at the times in question, had utterly fallacious theories as to why certain procedures or medicines worked.

 

[R. Richard]

Errrmmmm.... phenomenal exercise in missing the point. The sun is, as you say, very very large and very very heavy, and also very very far away. The midwife is relatively small and relatively light, but she's very very close by. The gravity exerted by one body on another is a function of the mass and the cube of the distance. Regardless of whether the midwife is actually touching the baby or not, the gravitational attraction between the baby and the midwife is greater than the gravitational attraction between the baby and the sun, because the sun is a long, long way away.

OK?

Simon:
I am NOT talking about the gravitational attraction of the Sun of a baby. If you will read what I wrote, I am talking about the gravitational effects on the Sun caused by the planets that rotate about the sun. The gravitational affects on the Sun could well produce changes in the amount and exact type of radiation produced by the Sun. I did not say that the Sun was very heavy [it is.]

 

[Seattle Zack]

Belief in astrology, as with most religions, is just a leap of faith, isn't it? You're believing that this person or newspaper column will somehow predict natural random occurrences.

Truth be told, what most call the modern astrological calendar was devised by the Babylonians, some 2,000 years ago. Problem with that is, the rotation of the earth has shifted some 30 degrees since then, relative to the signs deemed astrological.

So, by the calendar, I'm born an Aquarius, but by the actual stars in the sky, I'm a Pisces. What the fuck ever.

Just as the lottery is a tax on people who are no good at math, astrology is a tax on people who are no good at science. Morons.

--Zack

 

[Goldie Munro]

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
William Shakespeare, "Hamlet", Act 1 scene 5
Greatest English dramatist & poet (1564 - 1616)

 

[cumallday]

I bought a year-in-review science magazine last month and they had a small segment called, "Stuff We Pretty Much Figured Was True." It included short paragraphs overviewing science papers published within 2006. Sure enough: "Your sign doesn't shape your personality. In one of the largest studies of it's kind ever undertaken, researchers in Denmark found no validity for astrology's link between one's star sign and character traits." Don't worry though, there's always hope for tarot cards. That is until the Danish start investigating them.