ProtoQuant.com

VIII. A Personal Stand

We see Astrology springing from the first reaction of universality of the Man: finding his position with respect to the Universe. For this the Man did not have but his senses, and these senses did not cease to guide him even today. The same reaction to the grandeur of Cosmos we have today as we probably had ages before, as troglodytes, and this reaction has sublimated in the words of great Kant:

“Two things fill the soul with always new and always increasing amazement and reverence, as long as I continue to think of them – it is starlit sky above me and moral law inside of me…”

It was a long journey for Man to realize that in the starlit sky a moral law is actually written and that goes deep inside spirit. It will be probably even a longer journey until the Man – and World in general – will come to live according to this moral law. What we want to prove here is that the Man should not loose the Way for he is the object of a purposeful Creation!

It is customary for scientists to disregard the facts that seem to be outside of what they can understand according to the postulates agreed upon by the Science Establishment. This fact may or may not be wrong, but the human nature in its tendency to eliminate Reason from the life game, has two ways to bring forth monsters out of it: first by deification of individuals to the point where everything they say becomes Gospel and, secondly, by creating facts. Of the two, this last one is the worst: from the point of view of Man as a species, only God has the right to create facts! He takes this right whether we recognize it or not. When Newton declared “Hypotheses non fingo” by ‘hypotheses’ he certainly understood facts, because creating facts (sic!) is a sin. Yet, he was not criticized for the facts he invented – as a matter of fact he was faithful to his dictum – but for the assumptions he made in order to be able to use Geometry in Analysis. It is only Ernst Mach who criticized the Newtonian system for facts, contained implicitly in its synthesis of the World, is true, but never explicitly stated! Here we will try to stay as far as possible away from creating facts. At least creating facts in the name of which to dismiss or accept other facts. And this is not possible but only by referring to facts as they come to and from our senses. The rest is just imagination assisted by Geometry. The true puzzle that may be present here, at least for what is today’s notion of Academic standing, is that someone declares that there is a Physics of something that often times is just a hoax. Well, there is such a Physics, we declare it openly once again, and prove it by the methods of modern Mathematics.

Astrology is not a Science insofar as there is not a theorem of Astrology showing that from a certain event follows with logical necessity another event. Astrology strives to prove its truth simply by piling up facts, as they are perceived by the Scientific Establishment and reported to Community, and then linking the piled collection to whatever is preconceived as a common cause, either by an individual or by a group of individuals. While we have no rights to reject it, en fin de compte this way can always be framed as subjective. Physics on the other hand (as all the positive Sciences), has isolated this kind of subjectivity within a system of axioms casing the unprovable reality (the so-called first principles), from which then one proceeds, by Logic again, in a certain framework (usually Geometry). We will use the Physics’ way in bringing the Astrology to the rank of Positive Science it aspires. Mention should be however made that we will limit drastically the axioms to their natural realm: the Mathematics, as actually Newton did. We would like to think, and do not wish to be judged as arrogant though, that this is a kind of Principia Mathematica of Astrology: it is just the mathematical principles on which the Astrology should be based according to the opinions we just described. Useless to say, these mathematical principles involve Mathematics at its highest, at least a master level. And Physics likewise. As Michael Erlewine said somewhere, the Geometry necessary for Astrology is anything but simple. Well, here even that Geometry is far too less! For it is not only the common space shared by Earth and Heaven establishing a connection, as Michael Erlewine writes: “Although there are many different approaches to astrology, all astrologers appear united in the idea that there is a connection between the heavens and the Earth – they share one common space.” That connection is way deeper, containing reciprocal influences, as indeed the astrologers claim, and these influences cannot be revealed just by conjectures of geometric Euclidean nature. Whoever tries to understand the things should keep this in mind! However, we have here two positive facts for those who dare: First of all there will be a translation of the theorems in layman’s terms in order to bring about the Astrological facts in the spirit they are understood today. Secondly, for those who go to higher standards, in the places where the Mathematics or Physics cannot be referred to already existing works, references will be certainly found in this very page. In other words each chapter will be written in duplicate: one in the spirit of all Astrology pages of WWW, the other very mathematical, very physical, very theoretical, reserved to the few ones who can afford it. There will be questions, no doubt. They will be set publicly. The decent and academic ones will be discussed openly in ProtoQuant!

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11