Scientific proof

1
This morning I woke up to the first indisputable scientific proof of some of astrology's major claims in five thousand years of written history.

This particular line of inquiry was started 29.5 years ago (one Saturn cycle), and significantly augmented 11.9 years ago (one Jupiter cycle). No doubt I have arrived in this life with ample preparation for the moment. During the past day or two, the Sun has crossed my Midheaven, The Moon has passed over my Uranus in the 10th house (Saturn wandered there a month prior, just a few days after this post: http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... ght=#10896), Mars has been igniting my MC ruler Sun-Moon-Pluto stellium in the 10th/11th, and the Nodes are hooking up with my Lord of the Geniture Mercury in the 11th.

I am not making this up, and I'm not exaggerating (unless of course my interpretation of the data is faulty). Although the investigation in this form has just started, I can already see strong confirmation for the signs of the zodiac, rulerships, and houses. The current setup is geocentric, tropical, planetary (Placidus) houses and traditional rulers, but this doesn't preclude the potential validity of other systems (they will be tested in due course). I should also note that, while strong (3 sigma) correlation exists between certain combinations of the above mentioned factors and certain earthly events, interpretation of celestial phenomena may markedly differ from what we are used to. I haven't yet had enough time to look at the data to say either way for sure.

Times are extremely exciting, to say the least. My 1st house, generally happy Neptune doesn't allow me to say any more on this subject at the moment (she is usually friendly with my focus, but sometimes also at cross-purposes with the road I'm travelling). However, I will keep you posted here and can answer specific inquiries.

Have a wonderful day!
Peter

2
Having had to fend off the slew of inquiries after my historical announcement,:) let me now say that I have since been able to confirm results in two different ways: (1) by using a real control group in place of a generated one, and (2) by independent replication on uncorrelated data. So it seems my first interpretation was correct. Dozens of astrological factors have been shown effective, but this is only the start. The strongest factors come from mundane (house) position, the weakest from declination, somewhat confirming the Gauquelin findings. Zodiacal position and aspects, however, factor more numerously in the final tally due to the large number of possible variables.

I will now have to sort out when, where and how to publish this material. Any pointers in this respect would be appreciated.
Peter

3
Hi Peter,

A few ideas about places to publish:

- You could make $1m from the James Randi foundation. See:

http://www.randi.org/jref/index.html

I've often heard sceptical views expressed concerning the existence of this sceptical $1m, and whether any submission would be treated in a serious way. But it's a possibility. And $1,000,000 would be nice.

- Perhaps the most obvious place to publish would be 'Correlation', the UK AA's research journal. The advantages of 'Correlation' are that you can go into serious detail, & that material gets peer-reviewed. The downside is that it doesn't have a huge circulation.

- 'Mountain Astrologer' - can be difficult to get into, and they like the material to be reasonably accessible, but big circulation and they pay for articles.

- If you want to publish outside the astro community, the 'Journal of Scientific Exploration' might be worth a shot.

4
Thanks for the suggestions, Garry. I was thinking along similar lines.

Sorry, but can't take the amazing legislator-judge-jury-executioner Randi's publicity stunt seriously. I would like to publish in Nature or Science because that would go a long way towards healing the divide between science and astrology. For this reason, Correlation or other astrology journals would not be my first choice. However, I realize it will be difficult to get anything astrological into a top science journal, which means that JSE may be the best place to start out with.
Peter

5
Having had to fend off the slew of inquiries after my historical announcement,
I think you might have found yourself in the position of the latest fashionable pop group's record company preannouncing their next record. Expect much more slew :)

Some further suggestions:

- publish it yourself on the Internet

- publish it yourself (or with assistance) in book form

6
A book may come later, but I need to pave the way first to get there. And writing a book can take several years whereas an article can be put together in a couple of weeks.

I see no benefits in self-publishing on the Internet. It is a very fluid medium, and exposure is guaranteed only in very rare cases. I'm pretty sure this material needs a more solid place.

However, please keep the ideas coming so I can think them through. Eliminating other possibilities narrows down the path to pursue. Thanks again for your suggestions.
Peter

7
A quick update on this project.

I have successfully verified my initial findings and made the presentation more rigorous. Much of astrology's assumptions are thus scientifically confirmed although there are some surprises, too. In other words, I am ready to start writing the article as all analysis is done now. Would like to finish by the New Moon (Sep 22). This doesn't leave much time so I may have to stick to another suitable milestone, but we'll see.

This study is easily replicable, by the way, and the data is as hard as it gets. Once the article is published, it will be up to the scientific and astrological communities to duplicate results. Which should be a cinch if there is a will.
Peter

8
This is all very tantalising. Any chance of a sneak preview or do we have to wait until you go public? Also, will it be very technical statistically? I just wondered because you mentioned "3 sigma" in your first post which means absolutely nothing to me :?

9
Unfortunately, I cannot divulge too many details as this would disqualify publication in most journals.

The article itself presents statistical proof of the basic tenets of mundane astrology. It is more about research methodology and statistics than astrology as we know it. Naturally, astrological factors will be addressed but none of the usual symbolism will be present. In customary scientific fashion, one factor will be treated just like another in order to avoid bias due to the researcher's belief system. For example, Vesta making a 5th harmonic aspect to the dispositor of North Node will be handled no differently from say Moon in Taurus. These are simply two factors out of the over 50,000 I have examined. There is no presupposition of what works better in terms of traditional vs modern, sidereal vs tropical, heliocentric vs geocentric, etc. The findings from the study will tell us what is valid in what context.

The main result of my research is that there is correlation between celestial and earthly events where there was supposed to be none according to modern science. The novelty of my approach is that it is amicable to the scientific method, i.e. the data is reliable, the study is replicable, and the hypothesis is falsifiable. I believe this will be the first ever published astrological study that achieves this kind of rigour.

I realize this is not much, but still hope that it will be sufficient for now.
Peter

10
Unfortunately, I cannot divulge too many details as this would disqualify publication in most journals.
Ah OK, fair enough. In which case, thanks for expanding on it as much as you have done. It all sounds very impressive. Hope you get it written up on time. Good luck!

11
Hello Aquirata,

I wondered if you had made any progress on publication of your statistical research which you claimed last year had confirmed definitive proof of astrology? That was quite a dramatic claim which would obviously reverse the trend of just about all the other research out there (excluding Ertel on ' The Mars effect')

I don't personally have subscriptions to Correlation etc. Have I missed anything?

Mark

12
Hello Mark,

Thanks for your interest.

Nothing has changed since my last post. Due to personal reasons, my astrological self had to go into hibernation last Fall. I haven't made any progress, and the results haven't been published. I was scheduled to give a talk about my work at the NCGR conference in Baltimore two weeks from now, but I had to cancel my presentation. Only recently has my situation stabilized, and so it is possible that I can shortly pick this up where I left it six months ago.

The claim still stands. It is not a joke, not a bluff, but a simple statement of truth as I see it. Perhaps this hibernation was necessary so that I could look at my own work with fresh eyes and discover something new that will make the findings more complete. Time will tell.

Peter
Peter