136
Too beautiful not to share:

Aleksey Leonov, in 1965 the first man ever to walk in space, and in 1975 the commander of the Soyuz capsule in the Soyuz-Apollo mission:

Natal:
Soyuz-Apollo conjunct Sun
Apollo conjunct Mars
Astronautica conjunct Jupiter

March 18-19 1965 spacewalk:
transiting Skywalker and transiting Jupiter conjunct his natal Mars!
transiting Moon conjunct his natal Jupiter and Astronautica
transiting North Node conjunct his natal Soyuz-Apollo

July 17 1975 Soyuz-Apollo mission:
transiting Soyuz-Apollo conjunct his natal Jupiter/Astronautica

Also, birth time unknown - time of the chart was for the moment & place I drew it -- happens to have Skywalker conjunct the Ascendant :D

Image

137
Ouranos, thanks for your extra work on Donna Strickland's chart. 8)

But as for her statement that "she never bothered to apply" for full professor status; no-- I don't buy it. I have professional experience in Canadian universities and how they work. Her chair and dean should have encouraged her to apply; or mentored her as to how she should ramp up her c.v. if they thought she needed to do more to earn her promotion.

Physics is still a very male-oriented field. I checked her department's website and found five female regular faculty out of a department of 44 professors.
https://uwaterloo.ca/physics-astronomy/ ... ategory/16

I'm not saying Strickland faced gender discrimination, because I don't know her particulars; but something about her previous "career associate professor" status doesn't pass the sniff test. Generally a promotion does mean a pay raise.

Another possibility is that Strickland's dissertation research, on which her Nobel prize was based, was truly stellar; but she did not maintain a high research profile thereafter. Academic science today demands not just scholarly publications, but lucrative research grants, contracts, and even spin-off companies. U Waterloo in particular is noted for encouraging a business orientation among its science and engineering faculty.

[Big reason why astrology today is not a science and unlikely to become one.]

I just googled "Canada women in physics" and came across this short list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category: ... physicists . Clicking on individual names reveals that many of them are long-retired or not working in Canadian universities. :-?

Waterloo, Ontario is also home to another university (Wilfrid Laurier, also with few female physicists) and an independently funded Perimeter Institute, dedicated to research in theoretical physics. They acknowledge a diversity problem in physics so I don't entirely dismiss the idea that Strickland simply didn't get the earlier mentoring she deserved. https://perimeterinstitute.ca/who-we-are

Y'all may know that Marie Curie was the first woman to receive a Nobel prize in physics, and Strickland was only #3. So it's hard to know what to make of asteroid hits and misses when there are systemic biases that astrology, on its own, cannot detect.

138
Totally agree with you Waybread.
If a University finds a gem in one of her faculty (A Nobel is quite something), why wait for her to fill in the paper work. After all, they give honoris causa diplomas all the time to outsiders

But without her birth time, not much we can say to elucidate the matter.
Nobel was early Leo when she received the Nobel. Could this be a hint that she was born late afternoon (Leo rising) or early night (MC Leo) ????

Best to you,
Ouranos
Blessings!

139
waybread wrote:
Y'all may know that Marie Curie was the first woman to receive a Nobel prize in physics, and Strickland was only #3. So it's hard to know what to make of asteroid hits and misses when there are systemic biases that astrology, on its own, cannot detect.
A fundamental feature of quantum mechanics is that it usually cannot predict with certainty what will happen, but only give probabilities. If asteroids (or astrology in general) cannot make predictions with absolute certainty, that doesn't take away from their value. Also, my main point about asteroids is not that they are useful to make predictions -- although, to a certain extent, they can -- my main point is that they seem to indicate in a quantifiable, verifiable way, that there is a sort of order under the apparent randomness of things -- and therefore it would be useful for scientists and philosophers to study this phenomenon.

Also, of course physics is not the only domain where women have been receiving less recognition. Kathryn Bigelow was in 2010 the first female director to win an Oscar. I just checked her chart, she has natal OsKar conjunct her natal Ascendant. Transiting Kathryn went over her natal Oskar when she received the nomination. In her lunar return for March 2010, OsKar was conjunct mercury and Jupiter in her 5th house. In her Solar Return, Oskar was conjunct North Node in her 1st house.

If I find time, I may try to make predictions on this year's winners... Jupiter is transiting over my natal Oskar now. :lala Not only have I been doing research on Oscar winners, last week I drew a portrait of Oscar Peterson (when the moon was conjunct transiting Jupiter and natal Oskar) and I have been listening to his music for the entire week. In 2010, the previous Jupiter over my Oskar transit, I spent a month in LA. I probably ran into a few Oscar winners then :lala PS and thinking of it, during the 1986 transit, I bought my first car, which my then boyfriend baptized ... 'Oscar'.

140
Would love to read your predictions on Oscar winners this year Annadeer!
And maybe Alex has something in store.

It seems to me that the singularity in quantum physics explained as a point where some property is infinite could very well described the phenomenon of asteroids. For example, at the center of a black hole, according to classical theory, the density is infinite because a finite mass is compressed to a zero volume. Hence it is a singularity.

Chad Orzel, a specialist in quantum physics said this
"as weird as it may seem, quantum physics is most emphatically not magic. The things it predicts are strange by the standards of everyday physics, but they are rigorously constrained by well-understood mathematical rules and principles. So, if somebody comes up to you with a "quantum" idea that seems too good to be true-- free energy, mystical healing powers, impossible space drives-- it almost certainly is."

As human beings we live in a finite world (Earth) but also in an infinite one. One day, you walk out of your home and at the corner of the street you turn right instead of left... and you meet the man or the woman of your life. By this small change, you opened up an infinite array of possibilities.
Blessings!

141
I agree with most of what you posted, annadeer.

My point was simply that there has not been a level playing field for women in the hard sciences; and that professional bias against a large group of people (such as visible ethnic minorities) cannot be read off a horoscope.

Nobody has yet demonstrated that human affairs, let alone astrology, operate according to principles of quantum mechanics.

Further: if we want to extrapolate from one of quantum physics' key findings, that the nature of the observation methodology influences the experiment outcome, we need to heed social scientists warning about confirmation bias. (The tendency to seek out, select for, or interpret information that is consistent with one's pre-existing beliefs.)

Probability is actually a good way to think about how or if a given heavenly body "A" correlates with a given earthly manifestation "B", but we can do this through statistic al methods that have been around for a long time.

Some astrological researchers have worked on statistics and I don't know what is the current state of the art, but a problem in the past has been that scholars with statistics expertise have not had a good grasp of astrology, and astrologers have not mastered statistics.

The non-astrologers have typically posed research questions in a way inconsistent with how an astrologer would do it. (For example, correlating career choice with sun sign.) Unsurprisingly the non-astrologers typically found poor correlations.

I live in hope of an astrologer acquiring a background in complex data sets and multi-variate statistics. If you know of anyone, please let me know!

Because what statistics can show is how much a given outcome varies from what we would expect due to random chance.

In setting up a statistical study of asteroid "hits," it would be important to set up a strict protocol ahead of time about the data inclusions, because if we allow in too much "space junk" with big orbs, a study can show whatever we want. There is only so much real estate around the perimeter of a 360-degree horoscope, and if too many types of hits are allowed, the more likely it becomes that we will find them.

I think a study design would look something like this:

1. Identify all of the recipients of the Nobel prize in physics over a specified period of time, or a sample of the Nobel laureates. Are birth times obligatory?

2. Identify a suite of relevant asteroids. Some of these might be more generic. For example, the name of the Swedish monarch at the time, the names of co-researchers, or the institution where the research was conducted. Identify in a generic way how close an asteroid name has to be to what one is looking for.

3. Identify what constitutes a "hit." Planets and chart angles, for sure. But anything else? Midpoints, other asteroids, Arabian parts.....? What orb is allowed? Only major aspects or are pre-specified minor ones allowed?

4. Pick relevant dates. I assume these would be when the Nobel prize was awarded, but it might also be when the recipient got the phone call from Sweden.

5. Select the statistical method to be applied. This is the kicker. I don't have the expertise to say what it should be, but obviously we're comparing a suite of asteroid degree locations against another suite of important horoscope points by degrees and looking for match-ups. Also, given statistical methods require different minimum sample sizes.

We could visualize the research as a table, with the planets listed on one axis, and the list of relevant asteroids on the other axis. We've pre-determined what constitutes a "hit" (let's say, a major aspect within a 2-degree orb.) Then we put a tick-mark in the relevant cell when a hit appears.

(Alex, I hope you will connect with a statistician or social scientist with expertise in statistics: many of them out there, notably at your nearest university. As it is, your website is brilliant, but if you're as on to something as I think you are, you might just rock the foundations of astrology skepticism with statistical substantiation of your claims.)

6. Only after setting up the ground rules would the researcher crunch the numbers, according to a pre-specified statistical test or tests.

So suppose we had a sample of 100 Nobel laureates in physics. Asteroid Nobel conjuncted a planet or chart angle within two degrees in 50 of the cases on the date of the award. And then 10 more physicists had asteroid Nobel conjunct a planet or angle on the date they got the phone call. Then another 10 physicists had major hits with some of the other pre-selected asteroids. 70% isn't everyone in the sample of physicists, but the number is far higher than mere chance would predict, especially given that the entire asteroid population is over 22,000.

With a high rate of hits, even below 100% accuracy, would conclude that asteroid Nobel performed at a high level of probability, with a low margin or error (confidence interval.)

Ultimately what constructive skepticism is about is asking, "Is this as good as we can make it?" Because if this stuff actually works with a high level of probability, there is a lot of derogatory anti-astrology skepticism to be blown out of the water.

143
hi, guys! Sorry I've been AWOL so long, been doing a lot of writing and haven't had the time.

Lots of good thoughts here in the meantime, too many to really wade in now and drag things backward, but as a Leo Sun I can't fail to acknowledge and thank Waybread for his kind compliments about my work. Keep 'em coming! :lala

One of the areas I looked at this week was the recent rash of housefires killing children (8 in Philly on 1/5, 9 in Bronx on 1/9). There's a post at the site if you want details, but briefly, this occurred over a period where four asteroids were coming to station - Child conjunct Flammeus (closest to flames), Anubis (deity ruling funerary rites) and Requiem (funeral mass for the dead). From their stations, Child and Flammeus opposed House conjunct Atropos (the Fate who severs the thread of life at death). By itself that almost literally spells out 'kids die in housefires.' The swifter trigger was Sun squaring Fireman. I kid you not.

The other story was Novak Djokovic. He has this stunning string of points between the Sun and Mercury (an 18-degree stretch) that again spell out the situation pretty clearly: Achilles (stubbornness, inherent flaw), Koronis (coronavirus), Vaxjo (vaccines), Icarus (reckless acts heedless of the consequences, failure to accept good advice), Karma (the results of our actions) and Melbourne (where the Australian Open is held). In addition, asteroid NOT exactly trine Vaxjo!

When he was barred entry, the Sun opposed Novakovic (a sort of contraction of Novak Djokovic), putting him in the spotlight, and was exact on his natal Ascendant, with NOT and Vaxjo semisquare, trined and opposed by Koronis, which exactly opposed Saturn.

He has issues with entitlement mentality (a not unusual affliction for elites), with natal TNO Ixion conjunct Novakovic, and transit Ixion exactly squared Kimnovak for the immigration kerfuffle. PNAs (Personal-Named Asteroids) for his lawyer and the accommodating judge who finally approved his entry tie natally and by transit to his Ixion, reinforcing his 'specialness', but transit asteroid Hawke (for Immigration Minister Alex Hawke, who may yet revoke his visa and deny his participation) conjoins Neptune (disappointment), Damocles (looming disaster) and asteroid Australia. So there may be another tennis shoe to drop!

:D

144
Crazy stuff Alex! More fun to read the asteroids than to read the newspapers!

I discovered Vacchi and Vaxjo only today -- right now Vacchi is conjunct Eris, asteroid of conflict, and Vaxjo is conjunct Mars! In February both Mars and Vaxjo are going to transit over Pholus. I wonder what's going to come out of the Pandora box then.

Yesterday I posted my reading of the first vaccine shot on the mundane astrology forum. Today I added Vacchi, Vaxjo and Pandora to that chart.
Can you believe it: Vaxjo conjunct Pandora conjunct Apollo conjunct MC conjunct Moon! And VAcchi conjunct Jupiter, co-ruler of the Ascendant.

Image

145
I missed Vacchi, Anna - thanks for that!

Great chart for the first shot - but at 6:31 AM?! that's senior abuse! :D

I think you meant 'conjunct Pluto, co-ruler of ASC' - also conj Jupiter, but Scorpio is rising.

Recipient was Margaret Keenan - Keane at 28 Scorpio exact on ASC; Margret 28 Leo exactly squared. given in Coventry - asteroid Coventry 28 Virgo, with the lunar stellium (Vaxjo at 26), exactly sextile ASC.

Never ends, does it?

146
What the F ALex! Just when I thought things couldn't get any crazier! You need to add that to the thread in the mundane forum!

Thanks for the Pluto correction -- actually, I had been looking at the chart as a horary, using Regiomontanus, and was zooming in on the traditional planets and traditional rulerships, using Mars as ruler for the Ascendant - but it would make sense to use both MArs and Pluto