There is the "consciousness" theory to astrology but there is also very
corresponding natural patterns which roughly correlate to the returns of
planets. This more so with the Sun, the Moon, Saturn and Jupiter. So I
would think what one would do is start tracking natural patterns on
other planets which may just for the sake of simplicity correlate with
planetary returns.
But you are arguing with people who see nature as random and believe in
free will. I think they fear the idea that everything they do and think
is a result of patterns set in motion at the beginning of the universe.
Nothing to fear as it doesn't matter.
On 10/15/2014 12:41 PM, jr_...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote:
Salyavin,
Tony Nader wrote a book showing where the nine planets or grahas can
be found in our brain. He is saying that there is a physical
manifestation of the "impulses of intelligence" that are present in
the human conciousness.
IMO, any intelligent being anywhere in the universe would have to have
an equivalent "impulses of intelligence" in its own physiology and
consciousness in order to be called sentient.
But one argue that even rocks here on earth have consciousness--albeit
a very low one-- by its mere existence as a clump of matter in a form
of the various elements and their resulting atomic structures.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <jr_esq@...> wrote :
IMO, yes. The 12 houses and the zodiac would apply on any of those
distant worlds. Their solar system may or may not have the same nine
planets that we're using here on Earth. But the same "impulses of
intelligence" would have to be calculated in its own solar system.
I believe this is the reason why Patanjali wrote in his yoga sutras
that samyama on the sun brings forth knowledge of the world. IOW,
life on these earthlike exoplanets can be described by the same zodiac
signs that are pertinent here on our earth. Doesn't that make sense?
It depends on how astrology might work. Consciousness requires a
sophisticated brain to operate, maybe they are affected by gravity
which is the only known force to be infinite in extent, and therefore
affects things at great distance unlike the other known forces which
are locally contained like the ones that hold atoms apart.
Trouble is, if gravity is the culprit then planets are out of the
picture because they are too distant to affect us more than, say, a
lorry going past on the road. And the extra distances put between us
and them at various times in our orbit - that the ancients didn't know
about - would affect any charts too much for them to be reliable, not
that they are. So you can cross gravity off the list of influences,
and any other field for the same reasons.
John Hagelin claims there is a link between planets and parts of the
brain forged by quantum superposition between atoms during the big
bang. John Hagelin should be stripped of his PHD and publicly
ridiculed for even daring to utter bullshit like this that he /knows/
is complete bollocks. But he wants you to continue coughing up for
yagyas and charts. Or maybe he's so dumb he believes it? Nah, it's all
part of the con of using science ideas to justify their beliefs.
If astrology is real - and there is absolutely no reason to suppose it
is - I would avoid travelling to other planets. Just think what being
on Mars would do to someone with Jupiter strong in their chart! You're
about 100 million miles closer to it! And what affect will Earth have
on us? Just think if there is some physical force connecting us to
planets surely the one we stand on would swamp any effect from the
others, or doesn't ours count?
So your question makes sense if astrological affects are real,
different worlds around different stars will have different types of
influences according to however the types of planets and their
distance from brains might affect their owners. It would have to be a
universal effect. Trouble is, I think it's an ancient superstition
that clings on into the modern world by virtue of it's malleable
vagueness. I don't think it's a very good explanation for anything at
all, especially destiny and personality. Probably why NASA left it out
of the equation when they planned the trip to the moon.
Fun concept to ponder though...
