Science meets the spooky.
Since we reverted to Standard Time, I have routinely had two smoke breaks daily after dark; and since we’ve also had an abundance of clear skies, I have devoted much attention to the things I can see in the sky — the Sun, before dark; the Moon, whenever it’s visible; and two planets.
That’s ALL I can see after dark. No stars.
So, the Sun has moved during this time, or since the equinox, from the sign Libra into whatever sign it’s in now; a month from now, it will be in the sign Capricorn. Also, the two planets have never moved, not one bit, from where they are relative me, in these several months. That means that the fixed stars behind them have shifted, perhaps 60 degrees, and they likewise are now in other signs than they were when I first looked at them.
All of which recalls a project I conceived decades ago, that I may still carry out if I ever get rich.
Related: Why I believe in astrology. (At this writing, on Monday and Tuesday of this past week, events occurred consistent with my stories of what happens when the Moon is in Taurus and Gemini.)
It is said that there is no scientific evidence for astrology. I strongly suspect that this reflects the fact that traditional astrology incorporates many dogmas that may or may not have any basis in fact.
For starters, traditional astrology sets forth that at the spring equinox, April 15, the Sun is at the beginning of Aries — the sign, now, not the constellation. Due to the precession of equinoxes, that assertion is now roughly 4,000 years out of date. (The assertion was correct at the time traditional astrology began, during the Babylonian Empire.) This disjunct between the signs and the constellations continues around the whole of the Zodiac.
Next, some of the constellations overlap, and others have gaps between them. This is inconsistent with astrological dogma, that has each sign occupy 30 degrees of the sky.
I hope to fund a research project to be called, “Toward an empirical astrology.” We will recruit a thousand volunteers, each of whom will complete an inventory, all on the same day, once a month, as to, basically, how her or his day went, that day. With a sample that large, if there’s anything to astrology at all, we should see some patterns.
From those, we will adduce what the doctrines ought to be: where each sign or constellation actually begins and ends, for starters. Now, the passage of the Moon through the various signs is supposed to affect different people different ways, depending on each person’s Sun sign. Specifically, there are specific different facets of life that a person is supposedly prone to attend to, depending on which “house” the Moon happens to occupy, for that person, that day. Our evidence will allow us to confirm or amend these.
Another whole chunk of information will become available to us, from those persons who are able to provide the time of their birth.
And in the end, we may be able to get science and astrology to match.
Comments