Re: A theoretical paradox, and possible ways of resolving it.
The Sun
> A theoretical paradox, and possible ways of resolving it.
>
> I came across this problem on the website <Bad Astronomy>. (Thanks for
> mentioning that one, Bob Officer.) It was presented there as an insuperable
> objection to astrology. In fact there are ways of resolving it, but the
> problem and its solutions shed some light on the vexed question of how
> astrology works.
>
> The problem is this. The connection, if any, between the movements of the
> planets and life on Earth is still a matter for speculation. (It is not
> always even considered to be a causal relationship. I will refer to the
> "effects" of a planet, but only for brevity.) But clearly either the
> effects of a planet decrease with its distance from Earth (in the same way
> as other forces), or else they don't.
We are born in a solar SYSTEM, the question that is more obvious is
why WOULD'NT we be reflective of the configuration of the solar system
at the time we entered it??
> Suppose that they do. In that case, a conjunction of Venus with the Sun
> where Venus is nearer to us than the Sun (inferior conjunction) should
> behave differently from one where the Sun is nearer (superior conjunction).
Why does it have to be an "affect"? Do you believe organisms that live
in very hot water by volcanic stovepipes under the sea are AFFECTED by
the hot water? Or are they there as an EFFECT of the hot water??
> The same applies to Mercury. Mars, too, is nearer to the Earth when
> opposite the Sun than when conjunct it, and should thus have more effect.
No, they REFLECT more of the conscious personality because of their
proximity.
> The effect of Jupiter should also be greater on average than that of Saturn,
If you believe gravity is the "cause" of astrological reflection, but
it is no more than the hot water is the "cause" of the organisms that
live in it. The organisms live in the water because it is reflective
of them, we live in this solar system with a persona because the
SYSTEM reflects that idea, which allows that idea to manifest and the
non-gaseous planets at its center reflect that manifestation, like the
hot water stovepipes allow that kind of organism to reflect the idea
they are similar or reflective of in the environament they are in.
> and Pluto's far less than either, though this may be comparing apples with
> oranges. But none of these distinctions are made in standard astrology.
> Most astrologers seem to take the view that distance is no object.
Ahhhhh! Except me, the farther out the ORBIT, the deeper into the
unconscious we go, the planets composition is secondary to orbit and
adds definition to the orbitital path.
> Suppose, then, that distance from the Earth makes no difference to the
> result. There are thousands of stars on the ecliptic alone that are very
> much like our Sun. If distance is not important, you would think that they
> would each have as much astrological effect as the Sun. This is also
> against astrological practice, and with good reason. There would be one
> "Sun" on the Ascendant, another opposite it on the Descendant, a third
> square to both, and others for every aspect ever invented! The planets
Because they are outside of our SYSTEM, our consciousness is centered
in the Earth Sun relationship.
> would be insignificant, and the chart incomprehensible. So it seems as if
> planetary effects cannot be either affected or unaffected by distance...
Correct, they REFLECT consciousness, they don't CAUSE it. But the
orbit is symbolic of the degree of focus.
> Luckily for astrology, there are ways of resolving the paradox without
> denying such effects altogether. Here are the ones I've thought of.
> 1) Perhaps the effects do vary with distance, and astrology needs to take
> account of this.
Please read my book.
>Such a fact could presumably be established by large-scale
> experiment. "The Compleat Astrologer" mentions a piece of research linking
> terrestrial temperatures to the distance between Mercury and the Earth.
> Unfortunately no details are given. Does anyone know more about this?
You are barking up a no answer tree, astrology is not a science, it is
HIGHER than science.
> If the Gauquelins' "Mars effect" could be well enough established, it could
> be used to test this hypothesis. If Mars really has an effect on athletic
> performance, and its strength depends on the distance between Mars and the
> Earth, a disproportionate number of champion athletes should have been born
> when Mars was at perigee (closest to the Earth).
Mars in the certain position they were talking about REFLECTS the
consciousness of ATHELETES, the atheletes are born then because the
system is in a position (like the hot water stove pipes) TO ALLOW it.
> 2) On the other hand, it might be that distance is no object, and some other
> factor limits astrological influences from outside our own Solar System.
Everything is for a reason, but everything is not limited to primitive
science.
> For instance, a connection between the Solar System bodies might persist
> from before the planets separated out from the "accretion disk" surrounding
> the young Sun. Some form of quantum entanglement might fit the bill, if it
> could be maintained long enough. Some astrologers who favour this idea talk
> about the "frequencies" of the planets "resonating" with each other. This
> expression is not really as precise as it sounds. But it expresses rather
> nicely how the Earth might respond to events in its own Solar System, but be
> unaffected by others - in the same way that a wine glass is untouched by
> most of the sounds going on around it, but shatters when its own particular
> note is heard.
Is your liver still connected to the rest of the functioning of your
body after you are a fetus and it develops? IT IS A SYSTEM, like your
body is a system, one thing cannot exist without another. It is not a
bunch of separated bodies in space with no connection to the SYSTEM in
which it DEVELOPED.
> So although the distance problem does not prove that astrology is useless,
> it does lead to some other interesting ideas about astrology. If anyone has
> further ideas about this question, I'd be very pleased to hear about them.
> A. B.
I covered this with regard to consciousness in my book in the chapter
entitled "Planetary Lenses".
Let us look at it without the "distance" illusion. Time and space are
aspects of physical reality, parameters, real while you are in it
while you experience them as a physical being, but basically an
illusion, none-the-less.
Everyhting exists ALL AT ONCE EVERYWHERE AN EVERYWHEN now. We choos to
focus on a certain aspect of that all by becoming physical so that we
create the illusion that it isn't all one right now.
Make it simple. If you go to New Zealand there are all sorts of birds
there not found anywhere in the world. Not far from everything else
really, in their SYSTEM of eco-habitate that exists there. If you go
to different spots in the ocean you find different eco-systems, if you
go to different ends of the planet (equator to pole for example) you
find very different climates that manifest different things. Even on
the cellular level we see different constructs. But all within ONE
WORLD all affected and developed by that one world.
That one world is then within ONE SOLAR SYSTEM. If you back away from
our little corner of the Universe as I did in my book by showing how
insignificant our solar system and galaxy are, it is not that
difficult to imagine that each solar system configuration within the
galaxy and each galaxy within a section of the universe will manifest
different energies and different constructs based on the FACTOR of the
EQUATION of location and configuration. Which is ALL ASTROLOGY IS.
It is a SOLAR system, therefore the elements in it make up that
system.
The houses in astrology are really just which way you are POINTING
when you are born, what SECTION of the corner of our galaxy you view
the outer physical world FROM, a perspective. of OTHER SYSTEMS which
allows you to relate to those other aspects of yourself you chose to
forget were actually YOU.
Edmond H. Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
© 2009 Altair Publications, SAN 299-5603
Astrological Consulting http://www.astroconsulting.com/
Artworks http://www.astroconsulting.com/personal/
The SUN http://www.edmondwollmann.com/
That Wollmann Asshole
news:b09b8036-7c53-484c...@e34g2000vbm.googlegroups.com:
> Please read my book.
Now there's a way to get back at people. That book is torture to get
through. It's not often I get to see a book invalidate its whole premise on
the first page. I rilly, rilly, rilly was hoping you'd expand upon your
"dinosaur/gravity" theory.
So whatever happened to the rest of the "series"? I'm shocked none of the
major publishers ever picked up a bestseller like the first one. Auntie
finally run out of cash that you'd never pay back?
--
Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in dfw.*,
alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych. Supreme Holy
Overlord of alt.fucknozzles. Winner of the 8/2000, 2/2003 & 4/2007 HL&S
award. July 2005 Hammer of Thor. Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse
Memorial Dog Whistle - 12/2005 & 4/2008. COOSN-266-06-01895.
"You are among the worst goddamned liars that exists, and I'd love to kill
you in a ring and put an end to the useless crap which is you - but you'll
clearly never give me that chance." - Foamboi Bartlo in a calm moment.