Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!floyd!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!zehntel!ihnp4!houxm!hocda!spanky!burl!duke!unc!tim From: tim@unc.UUCP Newsgroups: net.misc Subject: Re: The Earth-Centered Universe Message-ID: <5517@unc.UUCP> Date: Thu, 7-Jul-83 13:48:06 EDT Article-I.D.: unc.5517 Posted: Thu Jul 7 13:48:06 1983 Date-Received: Mon, 11-Jul-83 01:11:36 EDT References: ihuxx.470 Lines: 61 [I] snagged on the woebegone complaint from the astrologer: "You don't know how HARD it is to calculate the celestial positions, especially because of the retrograde motions of the planets..." Followed a conversation very much like the following: Me: You calculate everything using RETROGRADE motions, like, with the Ptolemaic system??? Astrologer: Of course; that's the way the universe works. Me: Far be it for [sic] me; I'm a mere machine- twiddling CS jock. But you admit that, even if you don't believe in the Copernican system, that the numbers work out if you use it? Astrologer: Well, yes, they do. Me: Then wouldn't it be easier to convert a client's planetary configuration to a Copernican one, then calculate the relevant whatevers, then convert back to your Ptolemaic system? Maybe using a soulless computer? ...*snicker*... Astrologer: Why...I never dreamed...you're RIGHT!! I'll find a computer service *immediately!* OH, THANK YOU!!! *kiss* Now, hold on a minute. Far be it from me to defend astrologers, but something is wrong about this story. From my own former experience with making horoscopes, I know that you do not calculate the positions of the planets yourself. You look in an ephemeris and do some VERY simple arithmetic. (The only complication is that you have to use base 60 because you use hours, minutes, and seconds.) Your story is no doubt true, but could you provide a little more detail so that I can make sense of it? About the Ptolemaic system -- what is important to astrologers is the positions of the planets relative to an observer on a particular point on the Earth. It should therefore come as no surprise that retrograde motions and other phenomena which would not be noted by an observer above the plane of the ecliptic are important. In addition, using retrograde motion makes the calculations from the ephemeris much simpler. There are reasons to deride astrology, but that is not one of them. By the way, the fact that there is no scientific explanation for astrological phenomena is also no evidence against astrology. In science, observation precedes explanation, not the other way around. I am amazed at how many reputable scientists, such as Carl Sagan, use this argument. They really should know better. That is the same reasoning the Church used to avoid looking through Galileo's telescope. ______________________________________ The overworked keyboard of Tim Maroney duke!unc!tim (USENET) tim.unc@udel-relay (ARPA) The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill