The astrology of 2015

[kamaz]

Uhm, something going on in the sky which is observed by someone is per definition an astronomical event. You may interpret it astrologically though.

The idea here is that things which looks spectacularly on the chart (e.g. Grand Cross -- 4 planets spaced 90 degrees apart) do not look spectacularly in the sky. In a similar vein, Mike Molnar argued that the event in question was a daytime conjunction -- not visible to ordinary observers, but stunning to a professional doing a chart:

 

[Proximus]

Technically that is a "No true Scotsman"-fallacy because enough do.

I'm pretty sure there is an equation involving alcohol consumption and the true Scotsman theory.

Less is more I belive

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

Actually, in my case it might

If I do gravity survey work as a geophysicist, variations in G are measured in Gravity units (gu), which are 10^-6 m/s^2. According to Fundamentals of Astrodynamics, the order of magnitude for the acceleration in Gs due to the moon in LEO is 10^-6, so technically speaking, a correction for the location of the moon based on where it is in its orbit might be necessary for very high precision measurements.

 

[N_Molson]

And some Greeks astronomers (and very possibly people of other civilizations) made the hypothesis of heliocentrism. But they weren't taken seriously.

No, it was far simpler to divide the universe in sub-lunar and supra-lunar spheres, and then someting like 27 other crystal spheres sharing the same center (flat Earth) and rotating in various directions, with tiny holes into them to explain the stars (the light of the Gods or something akin). But even with that they had troubles with the planets (orignally planet = 'errant star'). :hmm:

 

[Ghostrider]

No, it was far simpler to divide the universe in sub-lunar and supra-lunar spheres, and then someting like 27 other crystal spheres sharing the same center (flat Earth) and rotating in various directions, with tiny holes into them to explain the stars (the light of the Gods or something akin). But even with that they had troubles with the planets (orignally planet = 'errant star'). :hmm:

They should have worked in EU politics. That way they could have legislated planets away and all would have been fine.:lol:

 

[kamaz]

They should have worked in EU politics. That way they could have legislated planets away and all would have been fine.:lol:

The condemnation of Galileo of heresy was sort of equivalent to legislating the construction of the universe...

 

[Ghostrider]

The condemnation of Galileo of heresy was sort of equivalent to legislating the construction of the universe...

I can't wait for the eurocritters to find out that planets aren't perfectly spherical...

 

[Urwumpe]

I can't wait for the eurocritters to find out that planets aren't perfectly spherical...

All no problem, but we have to nuke Jupiter a bit, because it exceeds the Varano Borghi IX Sphericallity criteria.