Has anyone ever thought that astrology might have a real physical basis, but not from planets themselves? Could the planetary positions just be proxies? At birth, subtle cosmic rays / high-energy particles from distant stars (behind the constellations) could interact with the developing embryo in faint, patterned ways—imprinting traits or tendencies that later "match" astrological signs/houses. The effect would be extremely subtle, undetectable so far, but not impossible.>cosmic rays cause real biological effects on Earth (DNA breaks, mutations, possible role in chirality of life, etc).>embryos are hyper sensitive to radiation during key development stages>stellar events produce directed high-energy fluxes that reach us at different times/intensities based on alignment and position>planets do line up with certain stellar sightlines—a planet "in" a constellation means those stars are roughly behind it from our viewOccam's razor favors psychology/culture/chance, but still interesting to think about. What do you think, /x/? Any part stronger/weaker than the others? Or does the whole thing feel plausible enough to keep the door cracked? Or do I need to take my meds? I will confess I have been without them for a while...
>>41737764The zodiac likely relates to a secondary morphological resonance with your other selves in the multiverse. Once of the biggest physical changes in spatial offset which occur are the region of space a person is when they are born, and the subsequent regions they are in as they mature. This doesn't mean that the sign itself is significant, but that the physical location imparts a natural categorization and feedback, essentially grouping people by their various selves over time (e.g. when they receive feedback effects.) A lot of what makes a person who they are is driven by the culture and society in which they exist, so these morphologically resonant feedback effects map pretty well (far from perfect, but as far as seemingly insane occult shit with a really difficult to understand reason goes, pretty well) to the personality types of people born in particular signs.https://www.quatism.com/theory.htm#morphological-resonance
>>41737764Science is young, it doesn't know much. I have already come across many things that science has no idea how to explain. Nevertheless, the scientific method of cognition is nice, I like it.
>>41737843It just needs room to grow. It's kind of being stifled at the moment, I feel.
>>41737843>Science is young, it doesn't know much. I have already come across many things that science has no idea how to explain. Nevertheless, the scientific method of cognition is nice, I like it.Modern science knows a lot more than astrology does in practical terms, that's for sure. I have yet to see a single reproducible technology powered by astrology.
>>41737881That wasn't very rude.
>>41737764There might be seasonal effects throughout the year, it would not surprise if early day length pattern would have some influence.
>>41737885I must be having an off day.
>>41737764>orbital resonance
>>41737764I've thought about this, especially since its pretty clear that your entire perception of consciousness is a few errant electrons buzzing around in your brain since when you were born (particularly in the sensory processing unit).The issue is, in Brace Belden terms, babies don't seem to have enough size to really be conscious beings, you only get enough physical heft to maintain conscious memories after birth.
>>41737764https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rD6LEfxAbc
Are scorpios like eagles
>>41738043I'm a scorpio rising and I'm a chicken
