Re: Astrología resonante.

[Jes\zs Cancillo Salas <cancillo@...>]

Planetario wrote:

> De paso, creo recordar que alguien tenia por ahi un articulo medianamente moderno sobre las teorias de Percy Seymour. Podria enviarmelo? 

Pues aquí lo pongo a disposición de la corrala.
Como no sé si está feo poner un attach en esta lista, si hago mal me
llamais la atención.
Va en ASCII.
Saludos
Astrology: the case for the defence

Can anything be said in defence of astrology?  Percy Seymour looks at some evidence that might be relevant to constructing a scientific theory of astrology.


In the English legal system, which many see as a model of what a judicial system should be, even a criminal guilty of the most heinous of crimes is given every opportunity to mount a case in their defence.
It must be obvious to rational individuals, even those with no scientific training, that the majority of claims made by astrologers are completely misguided, and that the type of astrology that finds its way into the press must be absolute nonsense.  Does this mean that nothing can be said in defence of even some minor aspects of astrology, and that scientific rejection of the subject is completely above reproach?
This article will look at some evidence that might be relevant to constructing a scientific theory of astrology; it will show that it is possible to construct such a theory within the framework of current scientific methodology and without invoking forces that we do not know about and it will finally show that the arguments against this theory have no scientific merit.

The evidence and its reception
The most detailed positive evidence to support a possible link between the state of the Solar System at a person's birth and success in some professions is that of Michel Gauquelin.  Ever since the revolution, exact times of birth have been recorded in France - this was the basic data used by Gauquelin.  He was able to discover the statistically significant result that people who succeeded in various professions were more likely to be born with a certain planet in a particular region of the sky.
Thus, for example, he was able to show that great writers and outstanding politicians tended to be born when the Moon had just risen or just after it had reached the highest point in the sky.  Although these were the peak times for these categories, two smaller peaks occurred just after moonset and when it had past its highest point on the opposite side of Earth.
Saturn in these positions was associated with higher than average births of eminent scientists and physicians, Jupiter with outstanding politicians and military leaders and Mars with great sportsmen.
Gauquelin also used these data to discover the planetary heredity effect.  This effect shows that if a child is born with a particular planet in one of the significant areas explained above, then one or other parent will have had the same configuration for the same planet at its birth, provided that none of the births were induced.  This result held for Venus, the Moon, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn but none of the other planets.  The correlation between planetary positions of parents and children was of a higher order of statistical significance if the child was born on a day when the geo-magnetic field was highly disturbed.  Eysenck pointed out that these particular findings were consistent with the laws of heredity.
Gauquelin could find no statistically significant data to support the role of the zodiac in birth charts or the position of the Sun along the zodiac, so his work offers no comfort to the cornerstones of traditional astrology.  It provides no basis for the predictive element in astrological practice.
The 'Mars Effect' has been most thoroughly investigated by other researchers both in Europe and America.  Although these other investigations confirm Gauquelin's results, these investigators have pretended that it is not necessary to take the inevitable conclusions seriously.
Suitbert Ertel, a Professor of Psychology in Germany, has shown very clearly, in 7he Tenacious Mars Effect, that all attempts to discredit this effect have actually confirmed the original results of Gauquelin.  Professor Hans Eysenck said of this book: "...the evidence for the Mars effect is now so strong that it seems impossible to deny; hence this is a phenomenon of great scientific importance..."
If this is indeed the case, why are scientists, in general, unwilling to accept these findings?
I believe there are two reasons for this situation.  The first is concerned with the 'currency of evidence'.  Just as the currency of one country is not necessarily accepted in another; what one group sees as valid scientific evidence is not always accepted as valid by another group.  Researchers in the physical sciences do not normally use statistics to make quantitative discoveries of 'Laws of nature'; they do use statistics to refine their results and make estimates of the errors involved.  However, many researchers in the human and biological sciences have to rely, sometimes entirely, on the results of statistical investigations.
The other reason for rejection is the more important one, for physical scientists, and it was summarised by the astronomer Professor George Abell, who said: "The Mars effect, to be real, would require new physics beyond anything that science can at present understand." The theories of relativity have been verified to a very high level of accuracy on astronomical scales and the same is true for quantum theory (including quantum electrodynamics) on sub-atomic scales.  There is no good reason to invoke new forces or modify our present theoretical framework.  However, Abell was wrong, since it is possible to understand the work of Gauquelin in terms of a scientific theory.

Speculation and analogy in science . 
The theory is a speculative extension of evidence from a number of different areas of knowledge and it uses analogies, but only as the first step in constructing a mathematical model that can be tested against numerical data.  All theories start as speculations and analogies, so it is unscientific to reject a theory on this basis.  One English astronomer called General Relativity' high finance in speculation' and some Nazi scientists wanted the theories of relativity and quantum mechanics rejected because they were 'Jewish speculations'.
Popper said: "The essence of a good mathematical model is that it should embody the bold ideas, unjustified assumptions and speculations which are our only means of interpreting nature.  The good scientist then puts his own model to the hazard of refutation."
The model I am proposing has two parts.  The essence of part one is bio-magnetic resonance and part two is magneto-tidal resonance.  All the calculations which are supposed to disprove astrological effects beyond reasonable doubt make use of linear interactions between the cosmos and life on Earth ¡.e. they all assume that the effects of the cosmos must necessarily be directly proportional to the forces associated with extra-terrestrial objects.
In many natural systems non-linear effects are more frequent and the most outstanding are resonant interactions.  In such interactions a small periodic force acting on a system can give rise to large effects if the frequency of the external force exactly matches the natural frequency of the system to which it is applied.  All radio and television communication systems work on this principal.  Nuclei, atoms and molecules all interact resonantly with electromagnetic radiation, and there are examples of gravitational resonance between planets and asteroids, as well as between satellites and planetary rings.  A radio telescope is able to tune into 21 cm hydrogen line emissions from the Andromeda Galaxy because of resonance.

Geomagnetism and Life
A great deal of evidence now exists that shows quite clearly that many biological organisms, from bacteria to humans, are affected in some way by the magnetic field of Earth. It seems as if many living things can find direction and 'reset' internal biological clocks by using the steady component of the geomagnetic field and its fluctuations respectively.  Much of the evidence can be understood if the response of the organism to the field is a resonant one.
Several years before scientists had any idea of the internal structure of the atom we never-the-less were able to identify elements, and hence list their principal characteristics, by means of the light they emitted or absorbed - this was the beginning of atomic spectroscopy.  Lorentz was able to explain some features of atomic spectra by assuming that atoms contained harmonic oscillators which responded resonantly to certain frequencies of light.  Lorentz was even able to explain the nature of the Zeeman effect using this oversimplified model of the atom.
It is now well known that neurones can be modelled using electrical circuit analogies.  Our models of neural networks show that the nervous system is naturally our principal means of processing information, but it is also very probably responsible for our internal biological clocks.
I am proposing that our genes, by determining how our nervous system is 'Wired-up', determines our basic personality characteristics, and the fundamental oscillations of our internal biological clocks are used by the foetus to work out the timing of its entry onto the stage of the world.  Since the neural network is an electrical system it is very likely that it can respond resonantly to fluctuations of the geomagnetic field that have a given frequency, but it will ignore all other changes in its ambient magnetic field, both geomagnetic and artificial, that have different frequencies.
The essentials of the theory can be clarified by looking at the specific example of people who have inherited 'lunar personality sets of genes' and who are likely to succeed in those professions for which such genetic sets are most suitable.  Foetuses with such genes will, if born naturally, resonantly pick up the lunar daily magnetic variation and ignore all other natural and artificial fluctuations to which it is not tuned.  The lunar daily magnetic variation has been studied in detail at some magnetic observatories since the last century and it has the right characteristics to explain Gauquelin's work on 'lunar personalities'.

My theory of bio-magnetic resonance readily takes care of the objections contained in a review of my book astrology.- the evidence of science.  One reviewer said: "Let's first put the lunar magnetism into pro- portion.  The compass needle does not swing wildly at moonrise; its position changes by about one-hundredth of a degree. ...the effect is masked on most days by changes in the magnetosphere that are caused by the buffeting of the solar wind.  A pregnant woman in a modern household will experience much stronger magnetic fluctuations from the washing machine and the food processor.' The regu- lar rhythm of the storage radiators will swamp the weak lunar signal." 'These supposedly authoritative scientific statements are a comedy of errors.  I have already pointed out, that, with resonance, it is not the strength of the force that matters as much as the closeness in frequency between the impressed periodic source and the natural oscillations of the system on which it acts.  The lunar daily magnetic variation has a frequency of two cycles per lunar day (or a period of about 12.5 hours), whereas interference from all electrical equipment has a dominant frequency of 50 cycles per second, so the one cannot jam, the other.
A World Health Organisation pamphlet on magnetic fields provides information which shows that for most household equipment, the strength of the field is not only of the wrong frequency, but in strength it is actually less that the lunar daily magnetic variation at more than two metres from the source.  The 'buffeting' of the magnetosphere by the solar wind gives rise to the solar daily magnetic variation the dominant frequency of which is one cycle per 24 hour period - whereas the lunar daily magnetic variation has a dominant frequency of two cycles per 25 hour period. Thus, at most, the peaks of the two variations would only coincide twice in a lunar month.

Magnetic fields and the tides
It is well known that the oceanic tides are due, mainly, to the gravitational tug of the Moon on the waters of the Earth.  The lunar daily magnetic field is due to the gravitational interaction between the Moon and the extended geo-magnetic field of Earth.  I am proposing that there is also an interaction between the gravitational fields of the planets and the magnetic fields of the Sun and Earth.
All the calculations which are supposed to show that this is impossible, because of the weakness of the effect, are based on the equilibrium theory of the tides.  I am proposing that a resonant interaction can amplify weak gravitational fields of the planets, to give rise to larger effects than one would expect on simple naive tidal theory.  This aspect of the theory is called magneto-tidal resonance and it is well illustrated by applying it to a new theory of the solar cycle.
A considerable amount of work, some dating back more than one hundred years, has indicated strong correlations between planetary alignments and violent solar activity.  Those interested in these results naturally associated these correlations with the tides, but most astronomers rejected this proposal. John Gribbin and Stephen Plagemann cautioned against such attitudes: "Although our own belief is that the gravitational key to solar activity lies much deeper below the surface, it is much harder to dismiss the significance of tidal forces that tug the surface layers of the Sun sideways across half a million metres... than most of the experts admit." Other work, notably that of Jose, has shown convincing links between the movement of the Sun about the common centre of mass of the solar system (due mainly to Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune and Uranus) and the sunspot number curve.
The theory published by myself and collegues in Vistas in astronomy proposed that the changes in the direction of small scale cyclonic motions in the convective zone of the Sun, which generate the new field, are caused by abrupt movements of the Sun about the common centre of mass of the Solar System.
It is well known that the equator of the Sun rotates faster than the polar regions. This differential rotation winds up the dipolar magnetic field of the Sun, so that after a while the magnetic lines of force in inter- mediate latitudes approximates to magnetic canals on either side of the equatorial region.  We then applied the analogy of Airy's canal theory of the tides to these magnetic structures. 
In 1845, George Airy, Astronomer Royal at that time, formulated the theory of tides that would occur in a completely circular canal running parallel to the equator of Earth.  He showed that the water in such a canal would have a periodic free oscillation that depended on its cross-sectional dimen- sions.  By choosing these dimensions to give a free oscillation that equalled that of the tidal period of the Moon, it was possible to get tides that were very much higher than those predicted by equilibrium tidal theory. 
We proposed that the free oscillations of the magnetic 'canal-like' structures was determined by the Alfvén speed.  This concept came from the work of Hannes Alfvén, who showed that magnetic lines of force oscillated like stretched violin strings, and that the speed with which a disturbance could be sent along a magnetic field was directly proportional to field strength.  Thus as the solar cycle progressed the lines of force would be stretched parallel to the equator on either side.  As their strength increased so their oscillations would be matched to the tidal periods of different planets at different times.
This Alfvén speed also depended on density, so at different levels in the convective zone, one could have different 'canals' in tune with different planets at the same time.  This theory is thus able to explain why planetary alignments should give rise to particularly violent solar outburst.  The theory is also able to explain the migration of sunspots towards the equator as the solar cycle progresses, and it leads to estimates of field strengths in the magnetic canals which are consistent with that measured in sunspots using the Zeeman effect.
The Earth's magnetic field oscillates with a very wide range of frequencies.  We are proposing that the gravitational tug of the planets on the entire magnetosphere, which is ten thousand times greater than their tug on the waters of Earth (because of it greater size), will lock in phase those frequencies (which we know are already present) equal to half the average planetary 'day' of each planet as seen from Earth, by the mechanism of magneto-tidal resonance.
The resonant theory of the tides shows that the basic 'carrier' wave frequency of each planet is half the average planetary day, and the variations of this due to retrograde motions and ellipticity of orbits manifest themselves as modulations of the amplitude of the 'carrier' frequency.  This aspect of the theory is thus able to cope with another supposedly logical and scientific objection trotted out dogmatically by a reviewer of my book: "the magnetic tides repeat roughly once a day as the Earth turns, but the planets are moving at different speeds, and so the period of repetition is different for each... When a foetus is near the point of birth, Jupiter could well have a period of only 23 hours 55 minutes and 30 seconds, while Saturn could be rising at intervals equal to Jupiter's average rate.  How is the poor foetus to know which planet causes the latter signal?"

Conclusions
It is unscientific to dismiss evidence because it conflicts with the establishment point of view.  The history of theoretical physics, and modern physics in particular, has shown us that it is wrong to dismiss a scientific theory because it offends our common sense point of view.  Speculation and analogy are an integral part of theoretical science.  A mathematical theory should not be discarded or rejected merely on the basis of so-called rational arguments based, supposedly, on common sense lines of reasoning.  Quantitative numerical testing of the model is really the only valid scientific basis on to which reject theories that have been formulated in mathematical terms.
Since there does exist some data in support of limited aspects of astrology and since there does exist a mathematical model, based on known physical interactions, which can explain these data, I plead for a stay of execution, at least on these areas of astrology encompassed by these data and the model.

Dr Percy Seymour is Principal Lecturer in Astronomy at the University of Plymouth.