Debunking Astrology (Part 2 – Problems that Astrology Must Answer)

A key feature of all scientific theories it that they must stand up to extreme, honest scrunity by the scientific community and strongly supported by empirical, not anecdotal evidence. Yet astrology has been around for thousands of years, and it seems that there are still great problems in which it cannot answer. Let’s take take a look.

Axial Precession

Precessional motion occurs when torque is applied to an rotating object and changes the direction of its axis of rotation. This occurs because the torque increases the angular velocity of the initial angular velocity of the rotating body, causing the axis of rotation change direction.

This effect also happens to the Earth. Known as the precession of the equinoxes, it is the slow westward motion of the equinoxes about the elliptic, and it is caused by the torque crerated as a result of the gravitational attraction of the Sun and the Moon pulling the bulge at the equator towards the elliptic. A full 360 degree turn takes about 25,800 years.

So what does this hold for astrology? Nothing good. Take 25,800 years divide 360, and you get around 72. In other words, it takes around 72 years for the direction of the axis of rotation to be offset by 1 degree. Since the house in astrology have never been updated since the Babylonians created them around 2000BC, that means they have means the equinoxes have gone out of place by around 56 degrees (4032/72 = 56). Oops.  If you’re Capricorn, you should be a Scorpio/Sagittarius now. Why hadn’t astrologers update the position of the houses?

Precession of the equinoxes

Why Isn’t Natal Astrology Based on the Moment of Fertilization?

Natal astrology focuses on predicting a person’s life based on the individual’s exact time, date, and place of birth. Needles to say, this is very problematic. Why care about when is the individual born? The hypothetical force should after, be perfectly natural as astrologers love to claim (after all, astrology is a science, and science only addresses the natural!), and I don’t see why should the mother’s womb act as a barrier to that force, preventing it from having any effects on the baby. A better model would be to measure the moment of fertilization, as all embryonic developments later on are largely dependent on this process. Of course, there is no way yet to determine when does this occur, which renders natal astrology useless.

Astrology Not Working as Predicted

There are quite a lot of studies that shows astrology isn’t better than chance. Just Google it. But let’s do a simple test, shall we? Let’s start with my supposed sign, Capricorn. Here’s a description I found on Virgin Media:

You are rock-solid, dependable, responsible, highly organised, goal-oriented, logical and clever.

You thrive in positions of power or any job where maths or money are involved. Consider an IT position because you love software and computers. You are also well-suited for being a doctor, accountant or lawyer.

I see. I should love maths and money. Well yes, I do, but I also love science, mysteries, debating, public speaking, writing blogs, challenging dogmatic religions etc. Not the what the conservative, quiet Capricorn should do. Anyway, let’s see some famous people born as on January 1st:

January 8, 1935 - Elvis Presley - Musician

January 10, 1945 - Rod Stewart – Singer

December 26, 1893 - Mao Tse Tung - Political Leader

January 2, 1880 - Joseph Stalin – Dictator

January 6, 1572 - Johannes Kepler - Astronomer

January 9, 1913 - Richard Nixon - President of US

January 14, 1412 - Joan of Arc – Saint

January 17, 1899 - Al Capone – Gangster

January 17, 1942 - Muhammad Ali - Boxer

Huh? I mean, why are there Capricorns overturning the Chinese monarchy, leading Communist Russia, being the King of Boxers, and shocking the world with his great songs? Shouldn’t Capricorn after all, be conservative? And how does Mao and Stalin be responsible and dependable when they killed millions? That just doesn’t fit. I’m waiting for an explanation.

Conclusion

Astrologers claim their work is science. To be considered as such, astrology must stand up to critical and sceptical scrunity. No astrologer I’ve ever seen could answer these questions, and before there is an explanation for the problems stated, astrology is bunk, or at least extremely inaccurate and unreliable.

References

John Daintith BSc, PhD & Elizabeth Martin MA. (Eds.). (2005). Oxford Dictionary of Science. New York: Oxford University Press.

Previous: Debunking Astrology (Part 1 – No Known Force is Strong Enough to Affect Us)

Next:

Debunking Astrology (Part 1 – No Known Force is Strong Enough to Affect Us)

For the planets plus the Sun and the Moon to affect our lifes and personality, there must be a force that is strong enough to reach us, and have a profound impact. The claim the that Pluto, a planet about the size of the Moon can affect us when even when it is 7,228,829,857km from us is an extremely extraordinary claim, and so the force must be exceptionally strong. Let’s see if there is any evidence for such a claim.

The 4 Fundamental Forces of Physics – Can They be Responsible?

The fundamental forces (or fundamental interactions) describe the way in which particles interact with each other. So far, every interaction can be broken down into 4 fundamental interactions, as described below:

Strong Interaction (aka the Strong Nuclear Force)

The strong interaction has greatest magnitude of all 4 forces, which is why it got its name. It is 100 times stronger than electromagnetism, 10⁵ stronger than the weak interaction, and 10³⁹ stronger than gravity.

The Strong Force

Quarks and gluons are bonded together as a result of the strong interaction. Curiously, this force doesn’t decrease in magnitude with increasing distance. Instead, once it reaches a limit (roughly the size of a hadron), the force remains constant at about 100,000 newtons. When quarks are pulled beyond a certain distance, it would be energetically favourable to create a new quark/anti-quark from vacuum. That’s why quarks are only found clumped together as hadrons, and no free quarks have ever been observed. This is known as colour confinement (not related to colour in the visual sense. In this context, colour is a property of quarks and gluons in the strong interaction).

The Residual Strong Force (Nuclear Force)

The residual strong force, as its name suggests, is a residue of the strong interaction. This force works between hadrons within atomic nuclei. The hadrons consist of mesons (made up of one quark and anti-quark; examples: pions and kaons), and baryons (made up of 3 quarks; examples: proton and neutrons). Mesons are transmitted between nucleons within the atomic nuclei, binding them together (and preventing protons from repelling each other because of their same electrostatic charges). Unlike the strong interaction, the residual strong force does decrease as distance increases, and is doesn’t exist beyond 10^-15 metres. As electromagnetism decreases over distance at a much slower pace, the electromagnetism-to-residual nuclear force ratio falls in favour of electromagnetism as distance increases, causing nuclides with atomic number over 82 to be unstable.

Why Not?

The reasons why the strong interaction is definitely not the force that affects our lives should be clear by now. The strong interaction only works between quarks and gluons, which are unimaginably small. Moreover, when pulled apart beyond a certain distance, quark/anti-quark pairs are created, and this means that there is a maximum distance between quarks. The same goes for the residual strong force, with its maximum range of effect of around 10^-15 metres. To say that this force works on a planetary scale is simply absurd.

Weak Interaction (aka the Weak Nuclear Force)

The weak interaction is caused by the exchange of W and Z bosons (the intermediate vector bosons). It is called weak because it is 10⁻¹¹ times weaker than electromagnetism, and 10⁻¹³ times weaker than the strong interaction. It is most notable for causing beta decay.

Uniqueness of the Weak Interaction

The weak interaction affects left-handed leptons, quarks, and neutrinos (the only other force that affects neutrinos is gravity, but its effect are negligible).

Flavour Changing

The weak interaction is the only known force that changes flavour. (not the flavour of taste; flavour in particle physcis means the quantum number of elementary particles.) Take beta decay for an example. For a neutron (1 up quark, 2 down quarks) to change into a proton, (2 up quark, 1 down quark), it must change one of its down quarks into an up quark. By emitting a W-negative boson, which then breaks up into a electron(e⁻) and antineutrino(ν_e).

The Feynman diagram for beta-minus decay of a neutron into a proton, electron, and electron antineutrino via an intermediate heavy W− boson

Violation of Symmetry

The laws of nature were long thought to remain the same under mirror reflection. The results of an experiment viewed via a mirror were expected to be identical to the results of a mirror-reflected copy of the experimental apparatus. This is called the law of parity conservation.

Yet, in the mid-1950s, Chen Ning Yang and Tsung-Dao Lee suggested that the weak interaction might violate this law. Chien Shiung Wu and collaborators in 1957 discovered that the weak interaction in fact maximally violates parity, earning Yang and Lee the 1957 Nobel Prize in Physics.

CP symmetry explains that when a particle is interchanged with its corresponding antiparticle (C symmetry, or charge conjugation symmetry), and left and right swapped (P symmetry, or parity symmetry), the laws of physics should be the same. Yet, it was found that the weak interaction may violate the CP symmetry, and thus create asymmetry in the universe. This is the most likely explanation of why there is almost only matter in the universe, as without this violation, matter and antimatter would’ve cancelled out each other.

A simple diagram indicating the action of CP: CP reverses all spatial axes and takes particles to antiparticles. In this diagram, CP takes a spin-up electron to a spin-down positron.

Why Not?

As the W and Z bosons have a large mass of about 90 GeV/c² (on subatomic scales, that is), their mean life is only about 3×10⁻²⁵ seconds. Even at the speed of light, the effect of the weak interaction is limited to a mere 10-18 metres, which is a 1000 times smaller than an atomic nucleus. That’s 1000 times smaller than the residual strong nuclear force, so how can it be expected to be the force that astrology claims? Next.

Gravity

As the force in which matter attracts and are attracted to each other, gravity is obviously the force we are the most familiar with, and we are all too familiar the story that an apple fell on Newton’s head (that’s fiction, but whatever). Despite being the weakest among all 4 fundamental interactions, gravity decays very slowly over distance and has infinity range, and is thus a likely candidate for the “astrological” force.

General relativity is currently the best explanation of how gravity works, and is currently accepted as the best model of gravitation by the scientific community. Developed by Albert Einstein between 1907 and 1915, the theory is extremely successful in its predictions, but not perfect; we mustn’t doubt the overwhelming evidence available for it though.

In terms of general relativity, gravity is caused by the curvation of space-time by mass, and that free-falling objects are moving along locally straight paths in curved space-time. These straight lines are called geodesics. It states that if there is a force applied to an object, it would deviate from the geodesics in space-time. Everything on Earth are not following geodesics, as gravity exerts force upon them.

Gravitation keeps the planets in orbit about the Sun. The curved lines represent the curvation of space-time. (Not to scale, obviously)

Why Not?

Although gravity spreads out infinitely, it’s effects still decay fast enough for the planets to have virtually none effect on the Earth. Jupiter, despite it’s massive gravitational pull doesn’t seem to affect the Earth’s orbit, much less Pluto (not a planet anymore in astronomy, but still one in astrology), with its smaller-than-Moon size and its unimaginably great distance away from the Earth. The only 2 celestial bodies in the Solar System that affects us directly would be the Sun, which locks us in orbit with it; and the Moon, which causes quite a number of tidal effects. Yet these are only a part of astrology, and thus gravity is no longer a candidate.

Electromagnetism

Electromagnetism is the force that affects charged particles and is the most misused force ever is electromagnetism. Saying it brings mystics, feng shui, and yes, astrology to mind. However, electromagnetism is the most encountered force in life, save for gravity. Electromagnetism holds your body’s atoms together; cause electrons to orbit around atomic nuclei; cause the repulsion and attraction of magnets etc.

Artistic rendition of the Earth's magnetosphere.

Why Not?

Astrology involves the planets, the Moon, and the Sun. But here’s the problem: only the Sun has a noticeable effect on the Earth. The only planets that have magnetospheres are Mercury, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune, and of course Earth – the other planets’ magnetic fields are too weak. Yet even Jupiter’s magnetosphere, which 14 times greater than those of Earth, extends only 7 million kilometres in the Sun’s direction, which means that it doesn’t affect the Earth at all. Plus the inverse square law stated above, and it is clear that the planets cannot affect our lives as astrology claims. The only celestial body that affects us electromagnetically would be the Sun,the Interplanetary Magnetic Field (IMF), which is the magnetic field of the Sun that is carried by solar winds.

What about a 5th, undetected force?

The hard-headed new ager may claim: “So what? There may be an undetected force that works behind the scenes!” Of course, the onus of proof is on the new ager, not the sceptic, but for the sake of discussion, let’s entertain that possibility.

What Characteristics the 5th Force Must Have

1. It mustn't decay over distance.

All 4 fundamental forces of physics decay too quickly over distance to have any true effect on a interplanetary scale, and thus the 5th force must be constant in magnitude. However, this poses another problem. To prevent our brains from exploding, let’s just consider the celestial bodies present in the Milky Way. Well, it is estimated that there are 10¹¹ stars in our galaxy. Isn’t it a bit naive to simply ignore all those stars in astrology?

2. It should be independent of size.

Since astrology claims the Sun and Pluto to have equal effect on us, that means size must be ignored. Well, then perhaps we should take into account every single asteroid orbiting the Sun. After all, there are 70,000 Kuiper Belt Objects in the Kuiper Belt.

3. Or it could rely on some undetected property.

Yes, perhaps science hasn’t detected a unique property that only the planets + the Sun + the Moon has. Such a claim however, will create even more wishful thinking for astrology, and thus will push astrology even more into the realm of blind faith. Moreover, astrology must explain the missing planets 4 planets in ancient astrology, and how could they have been accurate at all. And who is to say that there are no other planets now with similar properties?

4. Or it is sentient.

Alright. This basically invokes something along the lines of the god(s)/deities. Nuff’ said.

Conclusion

It is very clear now that simply isn’t possible that any non-sentient force can affect our lives and personality as astrology claims. The 4 fundamental forces have proved to be impossible candidates, and the 5th hypothetical force creates more problems than it aims to solves. The only alternative is to invoke the supernatural, but that simply puts astrology into the field of superstition, which it has always been since its separation from astronomy -  the true science of the cosmos.

PS: I know that gravity and electromagnetism aren’t explained in detail here, but we all know how they work,. However, I may do so if there are requests :-)

Previous: Debunking Astrology (Introduction)

Next: Part 2 – Problems that Astrology Must Answer