Astrology and Science -- Gravitation
Blake Finley. M.A., ABD-2
gravitation exert an indirect effect?: Suzel Fuzeau-Braesch
conventional astronomical point of view.
Conventional astronomy recognized the significance of gravitation and at the same time accused astrologers of ignoring it. Astrologers were said to not take into account the distance of the planets, to not recognize that Pluto, as a far distant planet, could not have the same degree of influence as the closer, larger planets. From this standpoint, gravitation was presented not only as a law, but as a causal factor.
For the astrologer, physical distance is of relatively little significance in this matter. By analogy, a close relative has a strong influence on you, regardless of his or her physical size or place of residence -- he or she is sometimes even more influential than a rather physically large next-door neighbor. Thus astrologers scorn arguments based solely on physical gravitational factors, and which ignore principles of more subtle influences which trigger such factors as psychological impact. In astrology, the influence of a planet is determined by its angular relation to the individual under its influence far more than by its distance from the individual.
· At the beginning of his Principia, Sir Isaac Newton took great pains to make it clearly understood that he did not use the word "attraction" in a physical sense such as exemplified by the force that bodies exert on each other. For him, it was a mathematical concept, aside from physical or primordial causes. In a passage from his Principia, he clearly stated that, considered from a physical point of view, attraction is in essence more like mechanical impulse. In section XI of his book (introduction) he states that "there is a certain subtle phenomenon through which force and activity determine the movements of physical matter" ... "gravitation would be triggered by an agent which intervenes continually and due to certain laws".
his principle of attraction as an "inexplicable, non-material
as classical mechanics did not directly treat the concept of subatomic
particles, it is erroneous to compare the movement of electrons around an atomic
nucleus to that of planets around the Sun.
It is further inappropriate to explain everything simply by gravitational
factors, even in scholarly astronomical texts promoting bias against
as it is presented by mainstream traditional physics is not a significant
component of astrological hypotheses.
Might gravitation exert an
indirect effect ?
means of sunspots:
· "astronomical studies such as those by M. Treillis and K.D. & R.M. Wood demonstrate the gravitational effects of the planets around the Sun on its own internal functions, particularly those which lead to the manifestation of sunspots, (and few would doubt our dependency on the great star at the center of our planetary system.)"
Return to preceding page