Astronomy vs. astrology. Someone once said that astrology is a divinatory practice capable of predicting only the past. It would seem to be just a joke, but after all—needless to deny it—it is the opinion of a large part of the scientific world… And this is where it gets weird because apparently, centuries of discoveries in astronomy have not yet managed to dent the fascination or diminish the interest that people of all social statuses have in this ancient discipline. But why so much interest in predictions and character profiles even at a time in history like ours, where knowledge seems to have deprived astrology of its fundamental basis? The answer may lie in the need to define our personality and that of others and in the way we perceive reality, shaping part of our expectations of it. It is a psychological need, then, a door we human beings need to leave wide open to the unknown—an escape route, one might say. And more: a desire to put the responsibility for our actions back into the hands of something greater than ourselves. All this makes astrology resemble some naturalistic religion—something one would not even have the right to opine on… But then there is the more crudely scientific aspect to examine. And that is what we are here for today. We don’t begrudge the many “believers,” or even curious and mere sympathizers!
Early history of astrology
The Babylonians were the first to believe that there was a correspondence between the motion of the eternal sky and temporal earthly events. In ancient times the universe was an absolute mystery, and any of its manifestations—such as comets or eclipses—were feared because they were interpreted as evidence of a higher will, signs of positive or negative happenings. Within a few centuries, astrology spread throughout the Mediterranean, and in the third century B.C., the Greeks began to predict not only the course of events but also the fate of each individual based on the positions of the planets. Although much time has passed since then, even today for astrology, the conformation of the sky (position of stars and planets) at the time of birth can influence the life of the individual. These days, however, we know the distances that separate the Earth from stars and planets, and we are also able to measure the amount of radiation that reaches us from them. Based on this data, it is easy to prove that the stars cannot have any effect on human beings. The distances are so great—on the order of many tens of trillions of kilometers for even the nearest stars.
In astrology, how do the planets impact us?
The physical effects of phenomena such as gravitation and radiation are, compared to the Earth, completely negligible. The only celestial bodies that affect our planet are the Sun and Moon, which are much less distant from us than the pseudo-constellations of the Zodiac. In short, astrology might have had a justification centuries ago when people knew absolutely nothing about the sky and ignored what they were and how far away they were. It was, then, safe to assume that all stars, without distinction, could have some influence on the Earth, as is the case with the Sun and Moon. Stars, planets, As is evident, it is only in the course of the last two centuries that the kind of knowledge has been acquired to render the claims of astrology nonsensical. This does not imply that before that time astronomy and astrology were the same and that no distinction existed between them. Only in ancient times were the words astronomy and astrology interchangeable. Born out of the common practice of observing the sky, they were later separated: astronomers continued to look up to understand the mechanisms and reasons for the motions of the stars or why the planets moved in complex ways on the celestial vault; astrologers, on the other hand, persisted in chasing the signs of the future and tracing in what they saw the myriad clues of celestial influence. Astrology implicitly assumes the existence of some astral influences due to the Sun, Moon, and other celestial objects, such as the major planets. If astral influences do exist, however, it would first be necessary to find the consistent laws that provide their nature and extent. Wouldn’t they? Well… currently only four types of fundamental forces are known: strong interaction, weak interaction, electromagnetism, and gravitation. Into what kind of fundamental force can we place these astral influences? Is this a new fundamental force? Then it should be defined!
Are they energies?
From another point of view, if these influences are not forces, then are they energies? If yes, the same problem as before arises: energy is perfectly quantifiable! Indeed, many forms of energy are known: kinetic, potential, elastic, radioactive, chemical, nuclear, internal, etc. What form of energy could correspond to the alleged astral influences invoked by astrologers? Science, of course, does not deny astrology the existence of interactions between various bodies in the universe. Gravitation, corpuscular, and electromagnetic radiation from stars do exist, whether detectable or not. But these bodies are so distant that they exert little influence on human beings: the smartphone you are holding in your hand at the moment exerts a greater influence on you than the positions of the Sun, the Moon, and the various planets; and the doctor attending childbirth exerts a gravitational attraction on the newborn child that is greater than that exerted by the planet Mars on the same newborn child, and a tidal force trillions of times more intense. And if astrologers continue to insist on the influence of the planets, why then not consider the possible action of the enormous mass of the Sun or that of the Moon, which is very close to the Earth? As far as we know, every force weakens with distance. An object farther away has less force on you than something closer. Yet astrologers claim that all planets have equal (or at least comparable) effects, so nearby Venus and distant Pluto can affect your life in some way and in the same way. This means that, according to the astrologers’ statements, distance should not be a factor in this force. Of course, neither should mass; otherwise, Jupiter would dominate the planets and poor, tiny Mercury would be excluded. So, one would want to ask them: What on earth is it all about, then? Through what form of energy can the position of a certain planet at birth affect the rest of our lives? A clear answer to this question has never been given. The so-called astral influences, which are neither forces nor energies, have never been confirmed by any scientific experience worthy of the name. In the face of this contention, astrologers defend themselves (with some very little reason) by claiming that the fact that a physical mechanism is not found does not mean that the mechanism does not exist. Even in science, there has been no shortage of entirely similar situations… When Kepler, for example, found his three laws on the motion of celestial bodies, he had no idea why celestial bodies moved precisely that way; specifically, he ignored the existence of a gravitational force that would act as a counterweight to the centrifugal force and prevent planets from escaping into infinite space. And Newton, too, enunciated his theory of universal gravitation in open contrast to the conception contemporary with him, for which the existence of forces capable of acting at a distance and in a vacuum was not admissible—forces about whose nature Newton himself was unable to pronounce. Unfortunately for astrologers, however, there is a big difference in their situation: The laws found by Kepler and Newton were able to predict exactly any kind of astronomical phenomenon—an ability in the face of which the momentary inability to understand the nature of the mechanism could even pass into the background, whereas in astrology not only does the mechanism remain unknown, the phenomenon that one would like to explain also turns out to be non-existent!
The Truth
Unfortunately for astrologers, statistical studies conducted objectively and honestly have consistently shown that astrology proceeds by nothing more than pure and simple combinations of chance and that signs or planets have no particular influence on the fate of any individual. In particular, a statistical study was seriously carried out in California with the preliminary consensus of some forty astrologers. This study—but there are hundreds of others—which used a series of “blind” cross-tests clearly and objectively demonstrated that the predictions of astrologers have no real correspondence other than by pure chance, at best, or that they are erroneous: the claimed and/or predicted correlation between the position of the planets and other celestial bodies at the time of birth and an individual’s personality does not exist at all! And in the face of such contentions, what do astrologers do? They do not respond; they stammer far-fetched explanations or continually shift the terms of the problem, even to the point of childishly retorting that “there are more things in heaven and earth than science can imagine” and that sceptics are just arid scientists who believe only what they can explain. Everything, we think, to avoid admitting that their system of association between heaven and earth is based on trivial symbolic assonances that have their origin in the mists of time. Needless to go round and round…Even today, so many centuries later, to define the kind of influence a constellation can have on an individual’s birth, astrologers, use only the characteristics suggested by their name length, Aries stubbornness, Libra balance, etc., and therefore by their forms: Leo strength, Aries stubbornness—a balance naiveté—thing but that! And of this – of their naiveté – astrologers are somewhat ashamed. What about the planets? Well…To think that when planets are in a given constellation, they can have a certain effect rather than another makes no sense since the constellations themselves are something completely artificial. Again, astrologers do not care about distances and masses but simply rely on visual and emotional impressions. Is Mars red in color? Then having it in one’s birth chart will be a sign of strength and virility. Is Venus bright and white? It meaplanets, a sense of beauty and harmony! In short, for planets astrologers match the characteristics of the gods they represent, described so well already by the ancient Greeks. In those days, celestial objects seemed to be gods, important spirits, or, at the very least, symbols or representatives of divine characters who spent their time getting in the way of people’s daily lives. People eagerly looked for celestial signs of what the gods would do next. In this context, a system that linked bright planets and “important” constellations to significant life issues was attractive and reassuring. And even today, despite many efforts at scientific education, astrologers have not changed their thinking one iota, merely slavishly copying the character traits of the Olympian gods. For them, thinking of Venus as a desert world covered in clouds and as hot as an oven is far less attractive than seeing it as helping to decide whom to marry. Then there is another aspect to consider, that of location. Indeed, astrology is curiously a child of the temperate regions of the northern hemisphere and, indeed, has been adopted only in these regions, certainly because of the phenomenon of the seasons. In the temperate regions of the southern hemisphere, the seasons are reversed, which removes any verisimilitude with the associated symbolism. Therefore, the sign of Leo, which corresponds to the boreal summer, is symbolically connected to the strength of the hemisphere and does not work in the other hemisphere, at that time in the middle of the austral winter. In the tropical zone, the situation is even worse from an astrological point of view, there are only two seasons, the dry season and the wet season (subject to regional variations), and without noticeable variations in temperature! In the polar regions, most of the astrological systems in place do not allow the preparation of lasting horoscopes. Certain stars and signs are never visible, while astrological “houses,” which are essential for the organization of horoscopes, cannot similarly be calculated and no longer cover, in any way, the ecliptic, in most cases. What, in these “houses, is the physical meaning of astrological “houses” and why can these not exist in certain cases above and beyond the polar circles? these astrouniverse houses,” wherever they are found in the Universe, do not strictly correspond to anything!
What sign would you have on a different planet?
From another point of view, if astrology were a science, one could legitimately wonder what the horoscope of an individual born in a place other than Earth would be since the laws of physics remain constant everywhere in the universe. And again. What sign could the first child born on Mars possibly be? Curiously, a kind of spin-off of astrology has been emerging in recent years, probably aimed at circumventing the problem of the impossibility of answering the mechanism that produces the distant influence of stars and planets. This is a new forecasting practice that claims to tie the fate of an unborn child not to the sign but to the month of birth; understood, however, as referring to the climatic season and not the astronomical one. It seems that to reach this conclusion, data on 1,749,400 patients were cross-referenced, showing that as many as 55 different types of diseases have a direct link to the month of birth. The healthiest are born in May, while those born in October may consider themselves unluckier in terms of health. The risk of asthma and respiratory problems is higher for those born in July, September, and October. Children born in November, on the other hand, are at higher risk of developing the notorious attention deficit disorder, as well as hyperactivity, while those born during the winter go on to have more neurological problems. Will this be true? It is not totally to be ruled out, and it perhaps deserves some kind of investigation, but this turn toward the scientific method will certainly not be the one to save astrology’s bad reputation. Other news is that of the now rampant fad for “scientific” astrology, which is, unfortunately, doing far more damage than the petty, simplistic astrology to which we have been accustomed for decades. Astrologers boast that they work out horoscopes by scientific methods, using computers to know and calculate the position of the stars. Needless to say, even assuming the correctness of the methods for determining the positions of the planets at a given time, the result still does not change.