When researching astrology, one of the main problems is adjoining evidence of universal synchronism with our current model of the universe. Modern scientific thought often teaches us that everything which can be referred to a mathematical explanation is indeed verifiable, therefore ‘true’. Nevertheless, in astrology the concept of computability regularly crumbles, in the face of empirical data that suggests an intricate level of entanglement between the physical and psychic worlds.
Despite my fascination with the intricacies of mathematical thought, I would refrain from adopting a merely numerical approach in an attempt at even partially ‘demonstrating’ the validity of astrology. The best approach is perhaps that of gathering evidence which may help us understand the so-far hidden intricacies of such cosmic entanglement, often but not exclusively using past astrological knowledge.
Professor Roger Penrose wrote about the elusive relationship between the ‘abstractly defined real numbers and physical quantities’. He warned against considering the idealised world of mathematics as a complete explanation of reality. The potential to obtain infinite subdivisions of any interval between real numbers (say 1.234…. and 1.235…..) may not reflect our reality. It is unclear whether the concept of ‘infinity’ can be applied at the microscopic level. Penrose related this philosophical consideration to the argument that consciousness may not respond to the demands of computability.
With a different approach, media-oriented Neil deGrasse Tyson has joked about the huge number of books on consciousness as a result of our collective ‘ignorance’ about it, subtly allowing for the existence of a deeper truth. In another interview he went in an opposite direction, arguing that consciousness might just be an ‘illusion’. Carl Sagan argued that everything, including the human mind, is all about molecular processes, and can be explained with physical laws. This ‘physicalist’ approach is not uncommon.
Are we really sure we can compute our whole reality, since mathematics are only partially applicable and Newtonian laws break down at microscopic levels?
Notes:
Roger Penrose, The Emperor’s New Mind, (Oxford U. P., 1989), pp. 112-113.
Carl Sagan, Cosmos (Random House, 1980), p. 134.
Neil deGrasse Tyson: Is Consciousness an Illusion? (YouTube, Jul 2023).
Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson talks about books on consciousness (YouTube, Jan 2023).
