<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>UK-Skeptics articles and commentary &#187; astrology</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ukskeptics.com/cms/tag/astrology/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ukskeptics.com/cms</link>
	<description>UK-Skeptics articles and commentary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Dec 2009 05:41:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Astrology and Precession</title>
		<link>http://www.ukskeptics.com/cms/astrology-and-precession/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ukskeptics.com/cms/astrology-and-precession/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 09:29:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Jackson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Paranormal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[astrology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Precession]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[star sign]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ukskeptics.com/cms/?p=657</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[





vbloke © 2006
Let&#8217;s assume for a minute that astrology actually    works. No questions, it just does. Now, when the astrological signs were drawn up originally, it was done around    600BC. Each sign (e.g.: Scorpio) are exactly 30° wide &#8211; they are measured    eastward along the ecliptic [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- Easy AdSense V2.82 -->
<!-- Post[count: 3] -->
<div class="ezAdsense adsense adsense-leadin" style="text-align:center;margin:12px;"><script type="text/javascript"><!--
google_ad_client = "pub-5227179739731971";
/* 468x60, created 30/05/09 */
google_ad_slot = "0591718367";
google_ad_width = 468;
google_ad_height = 60;
//-->
</script>
<script type="text/javascript"
src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js">
</script></div><hr />
<p class="author">vbloke © 2006</p>
<hr style="margin-bottom: 16px;" /><span class="drop_cap">L</span>et&#8217;s assume for a minute that astrology actually    works. No questions, it just does. Now, when the astrological signs were drawn up originally, it was done around    600BC. Each sign (e.g.: Scorpio) are exactly 30° wide &#8211; they are measured    eastward along the ecliptic from the vernal equinox, which is the intersection    of the elliptic and the celestial equator and is the zero point.<br class="l" /><br class="l" />When the system was originally set up, the zero point was in Aries and was called    the &#8220;first point of Aries&#8221;.<span id="more-657"></span><br class="l" /><br class="l" />Aries encompassed the first 30° of the ecliptic, next came Taurus (30°    to 60°), Gemini (60° to 90°) and so on&#8230;</p>
<p>This scheme ignored the actual stars themselves, but uniformity was more important    than fussing about star positions.</p>
<p>Since then, precession has caused the celestial equator to wobble so as to    cause the intersection point between it and the ecliptic to move westward along    the ecliptic by 36° or a tenth of the way around.</p>
<p>Your birth sign ignores the effect of precession. What a horoscope calls &#8220;Aries&#8221; is the 30° segment along the ecliptic that is east of the current location of the vernal equinox &#8211; but today, most of it is in Pisces. The next 30° segment (called Taurus in the horoscope) is mostly in Aries. The astrological signs are directions in space that no longer correspond to the constellations that bear their names.</p>
<p>Precession causes the position of the sun on the vernal equinox to move as    the earth wobbles on its axis &#8211; then again, the position of the sun varies on    every date (analemma). This means that it is not only the names of the zodiac    signs that are now wrong, the names of the tropics are also inaccurate!</p>
<p>This all dates to when the sun is within the constellation of your birth sign.    According to astrology (corrected for precession &#8211; although these dates will    vary slightly from year to year), you may find that you&#8217;re actually a different    birth sign.</p>
<p>If you were born between November 30th and December 17th, you&#8217;re actually an    Ophiuchus.</p>
<p>What happens in astrology is that the sun travels through the traditional 12    signs of the zodiac over the course of the year. Whatever sign the sun is in    when you&#8217;re born is the sign you &#8220;are&#8221;. However, over the past 2,600    years (since the charts were drawn up), the precession of the earth has shifted    the ecliptic westwards and now the sun visits the constellation of Ophiuchus    during November/December. I very much doubt you&#8217;ll find a horoscope that takes    this into account.</p>
<blockquote><p><strong>Capricorn</strong>: January 20th to February 16th<br />
<strong>Aquarius</strong>: February 17th to March 11th<br />
<strong>Pisces</strong>: March 12th to April 18th<br />
<strong>Aries</strong>: April 19th to May 13th<br />
<strong>Taurus</strong>: May 14th to June 21st<br />
<strong>Gemini</strong>: June 22nd to July 20th<br />
<strong>Cancer</strong>: July 21st to August 10th<br />
<strong>Leo</strong>: August 11th to September 16th<br />
<strong>Virgo</strong>: September 17th to October 30th<br />
<strong>Libra</strong>: October 31st to November 23rd<br />
<strong>Scorpio</strong>: November 24th to November 29th<br />
<strong>Ophiuchus</strong>: November 30th to December 17th<br />
<strong>Sagittarius</strong>: December 18th to January 19th</p></blockquote>
<p>Since I&#8217;m no longer Cancer and am now Gemini &#8220;all of a sudden&#8221;, does    this mean I&#8217;ll have to change my character and I can sue astrologers for giving    me wrong information?<br />
<br class="l" /><br class="l" /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ukskeptics.com/cms/astrology-and-precession/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Zodiacal astrology</title>
		<link>http://www.ukskeptics.com/cms/zodiacal-astrology/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ukskeptics.com/cms/zodiacal-astrology/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Dec 2008 09:32:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Jackson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Paranormal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[astrology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[zodiac]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ukskeptics.com/cms/?p=583</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
vbloke © 2006
Western (Zodiacal) astrology relies on the position    of the Sun, Moon and planets at the time of your birth to determine your personality.    Each planet has a particular &#8220;personality&#8221; and affects different aspects    of your personality.How this happens is never really explained, why it [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<hr />
<p class="author">vbloke © 2006</p>
<hr style="margin-bottom: 16px;" /><span class="drop_cap">W</span>estern (Zodiacal) astrology relies on the position    of the Sun, Moon and planets at the time of your birth to determine your personality.    Each planet has a particular &#8220;personality&#8221; and affects different aspects    of your personality.<br class-"j" /><br class-"j" />How this happens is never really explained, why it kicks in at the time of    your birth instead of the time of conception is also never really explained    either. Is there something in the womb that shields you from the astrological    effects?<br class-"j" /><br class-"j" />If it is a &#8220;force&#8221; that emanates from the astronomical bodies that    effects you, then it is an entirely new force unknown to science. We only have    four forces to work with &#8211; gravity, electromagnetic , the strong nuclear force    and weak nuclear force. The last two only work at atomic levels (they keep atoms    held together and can only be felt if you&#8217;re about the size of an atom), so    they can&#8217;t be any use.<span id="more-583"></span><br class-"j" /><br class-"j" /></p>
<p>Gravity obeys what is called the &#8220;inverse square law&#8221; &#8211; that is,    it drops off rapidly the further you get, imagine standing next to a hot radiator    &#8211; the heat is intense, but you feel it less the further you move away from it.    True, the gravity of the planets reaches out for millions of miles, but in the    case of Earth, the Sun and Moon overpower the combined gravity of every other    planet in the solar system. Even the building you are standing in overpowers    the gravity of Jupiter.</p>
<p>The electromagnetic force relies on the planets having an electric charge.    Whilst the larger planets (Saturn, Jupiter, Uranus and Neptune) do, they are    too far away for their relatively weak electric fields to affect us. The Sun&#8217;s    electric charge dwarfs the entire electric output of all the planets. It&#8217;s like    comparing a 1.5 volt battery to a power station.</p>
<p>So, this force must be something else. Something that does not diminish by    distance and that helps tiny Pluto have the same effect as giant Jupiter.</p>
<p>Astrologers have sometimes said that there is a &#8220;quantum force&#8221; at    work, neatly using Quantum Physics, something that is, let&#8217;s face it, very complicated    and not easily understood unless you have a lot of PhD&#8217;s.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s a quick note though. You might want to note this down for future reference.    If something has &#8220;quantum&#8221; effects, it operates at the sub-atomic    scale. Like the strong and weak nuclear force, quantum effects don&#8217;t work if    you&#8217;re bigger than an atom. A lot of people claim &#8220;quantum effects&#8221;    for all sorts of alternative therapies and products. Quantum effects operate    on things so small, even the most powerful electron microscopes in the world    cannot see them. Once you get to the size of a thousand thousandth of a millimetre,    quantum effects no longer work. Write that down.</p>
<p>So, a &#8220;quantum force&#8221; would only work if Jupiter was an atomic nucleus    and you were an electron.</p>
<p>When the zodiac was originally drawn up in around 600BC, astrologers knew about    6 planets &#8211; Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Saturn and Jupiter. These were given    arbitrary names and characters, as mankind likes to anthropomorphise things.    Each planet was known to move around in the sky (the word &#8220;planet&#8221;    actually means &#8220;wanderer&#8221; in ancient Greek) and appeared to follow    the same line across the sky as the Sun and Moon &#8211; a line we call the Ecliptic.    It is the constellations that lie on this line that we call the zodiac. Every    planet passes through the constellations on their journey around the Sun.</p>
<p>So, so far we have six planets, the Moon and Sun and an unknown force. These    were considered to affect your personality at the time of your birth.</p>
<p class="subheading">Hang on, aren&#8217;t there nine planets?</p>
<p>All the planets past Jupiter are too far away to be seen properly without telescopes,    so the ancients couldn&#8217;t have known about them. The telescope was invented around    1608 (not by Galileo, as often claimed, but by a Dutch spectacle maker that    we don&#8217;t know the name of), this means that, whilst these planets obviously    must be having an effect on your horoscope, they weren&#8217;t known about, so they    couldn&#8217;t include them in their calculations.</p>
<p>For a start, this raises an interesting question &#8211; these planets had an effect,    but couldn&#8217;t be included in horoscope calculations &#8211; why didn&#8217;t ancient astrologers    notice this &#8220;extra&#8221; influence coming from somewhere? If, as they claim,    astrology is a science, this effect should be measurable and quantifiable and    the positions and sizes of these planets should be calculable by extrapolating    from this extra influence. This never happened.</p>
<p>Uranus was discovered in 1781 by Sir William Herschel. Astrologers never saw    it coming. Instead, Uranus was quietly included in their calculations. Suddenly,    your horoscope changed to include this massive new planet that had always existed.    Does the force that controls astrology only work when it&#8217;s seen? If we don&#8217;t    know about something, does it have no effect? If so, you could cross a motorway    safely, just by closing your eyes and wearing earplugs.</p>
<p>Neptune was discovered in 1846 by collaboration between Urbain Le Verrier,    John Couch Adams and Johann Gottfried Galle. See above.</p>
<p>Pluto was discovered in 1930 by Clyde Tombaugh. Pluto is a bit of an anomaly    though, it&#8217;s tiny. Also, it&#8217;s orbit is what astronomers call &#8220;eccentric&#8221;;    it orbits at an angle to the sun &#8211; the other eight planets all lie roughly within    the same plane, but Pluto sits at an angle of 17°. It&#8217;s also the only planet    whose orbit takes it inside the orbit of another planet &#8211; for a part of it&#8217;s    year, Pluto is closer to the Sun than Neptune, the rest of the time, it&#8217;s further    away. Why does Pluto have the same effect as it&#8217;s giant neighbour? To put it    another way, Neptune is nearly 58 times the volume of Earth, whereas Pluto is    smaller than Earth&#8217;s Moon.</p>
<p>What about Sedna? 2002UB313, the recently discovered planet candidate? The    asteroid belt? The Kuiper Belt? Comets? Do these have an effect? Some of the    moons of Saturn and Jupiter are larger than Mercury and Pluto! Do they have    an effect? Why not? Things are looking a bit dodgy for astrology.</p>
<p class="subheading">So, that&#8217;s it for planets &#8211; isn&#8217;t it?</p>
<p>No.</p>
<p>You see, every dot of light in the sky (apart from the planets) is a star.    Our sun is a star as well, it just so happens that we&#8217;re very close to it. Do    other stars have planets?</p>
<p>Yes.</p>
<p>Since 1989, planets have been found around other stars. In total so far, astronomers    have discovered 188 &#8220;extrasolar&#8221; planets. 188! That&#8217;s a lot of planets.</p>
<p>Most of these are huge. In our solar system, Jupiter is the king of planets.    It is huge &#8211; 1321 times the volume of Earth! Most of these extrasolar planets    are what are called &#8220;Hot Jupiter&#8217;s&#8221; &#8211; planets that make Jupiter seem    small. Some of them are truly gigantic &#8211; measured at up to 11 times the mass    of Jupiter. 11 times! That&#8217;s one big planet.</p>
<p>Astronomers recently discovered a &#8220;cold Earth&#8221; &#8211; a rocky planet around    5 times the mass of Earth orbiting a distant star in our own galaxy. Surely    this should affect your horoscope?</p>
<p>If, as astrologers would have us believe, their force does not diminish by    distance, then these planets should have a measurable effect on your horoscope.    We can&#8217;t see them directly, so why should they have an effect? Well, we can&#8217;t    see Pluto, Sedna or 2002UB313 without very powerful telescopes, but these have    been included in horoscopes as having effects, so why not these massive extrasolar    planets? You see, these planets haven&#8217;t been given &#8220;traditional&#8221; names    like our solar system planets, they&#8217;re called things like 16 Cyg B b, HD 216435    b and 55 Cnc d. What does that tell you about their characteristics?</p>
<p>Astronomers have theorised that most of the stars we can see might have planets.    We can only detect them by inferring them from how they effect their parent    star, so the process is slow and laborious. There are definitely more than 188    out there.</p>
<p>One day, your horoscope will have to include all these planets, but where will    the line be drawn? Theoretically, there could be billions of planets in the    observable universe. Your horoscope will be very cluttered and probably the    size of the Encyclopaedia Britannica every day to include the effects of all    these other planets. Phew.</p>
<p class="subheading">Is that it?</p>
<p>No.</p>
<p>What happens when a star &#8220;dies&#8221;? Well, some stars explode violently    in a supernova, some expand into red giants and then shrink, slowly cooling    over billions of years. What could happen is, if one of these stars had a planetary    system, some of these planets could be thrown out of their orbits and sent flying    through the universe. A planet without a star. These would be almost impossible    to see, but it is almost certain that there are some out there. Would these    &#8220;wanderers&#8221; have an effect as well?</p>
<p>Astrologers want to claim their profession is a science. If so, then they have    to play by the rules of science. Their force should have a measurable and predictable    effect. We should be able to infer and predict things based on this force. No    astrologer ever predicted Uranus, Neptune or Pluto based on their calculations,    even though they must have been having an effect by their force acting on us.    No astrologer predicted extra solar planets or recently discovered comets based    on their calculations of the zodiac. No astrologer will tell you that the planets    were named arbitrarily by the ancients, these names are used by astrologers    to personify them and give them characteristics. Mars was the god of war &#8211; hence    it controls aggression. This is because it has a reddish colour in the sky and    red is the colour of aggression. What would your horoscope be like if it had    been called Diana, the Roman goddess of hunting, or Aphrodite, the Greek goddess    of Love?</p>
<p>Uranus, Neptune and Pluto&#8217;s names were decided by a vote. There was no consideration    of their &#8220;characters&#8221; when they were named. What does this say about    their effect on your horoscope?</p>
<hr />In August 2006, <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/5282440.stm" target="_blank">Pluto lost its official status as a planet</a>.</p>
<hr />
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ukskeptics.com/cms/zodiacal-astrology/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
