Towards a scientific explanation of astrology
At birth, we experience a trauma that leaves an indelible mark on us. The brain has an electrochemical functioning and is therefore not immune to the influence of electromagnetic fields. The sun is the most powerful source of electromagnetic radiation around us; therefore it may exert an influence on neurons, particularly during that gestational moment.
When Carl Sagan developed his acclaimed television series “Cosmos”, he did not only spread his knowledge of astronomy, physics and science, or tell us about the achievements of the Viking and Voyager solar system expeditions but, among other things, he also used this space to advocate against superstition, religions (which he considered as a form of institutionalised superstition) and astrology, pointing out that the latter lacked any scientific basis. Sagan’s great influence on me meant that, as soon as I finished high school, I began studying for a degree in physics to become an astronomer, just like him.
Thanks to that scientific training, I became an agnostic and — at that time — was completely opposed to the belief in astrology. It was not until my partner at the time, a very lovely woman, told me about Linda Goodman’s books and recommended that I read them, that I began to take the subject with more credulity. Indeed, I was so surprised to find that the personality characteristics Goodman attributed to each sign matched, to the letter, those of the people I knew best: my partner, my parents, my sisters and my best friends, among others. From then on I became a believer and student of astrology.
As time has gone by, I have become more and more aware of the importance of finding out a person’s zodiac sign to begin to know them and thus understand them in all their human complexity. On the other hand, by being aware of the signs of each of the people with whom I interact frequently, I have consistently found that the personality characteristics of each sign are clearly expressed and manifested in each of us, whether we want them to be or not. Even so, my basic training in science, and in particular in physics, as well as my knowledge in cognitive sciences, make me think that there must be a scientific explanation for this phenomenon, and I came up with the most elementary of conjectures, which is none other than the possible influence of the Sun on the nervous system, at the moment of birth.
At the moment of birth we experience severe trauma, the strongest that can be experienced in life, and which undoubtedly leaves an indelible mark on us. The younger the brain the more susceptible it is to being shaped by our experiences. This is how our mother’s voice, which we already heard in the womb, before we were born, is imprinted in the deepest part of our psyche and with it the language and even the accent with which she pronounces it. That is why we call the language we are exposed to before birth “mother tongue” and why it is so hard to learn another language — usually for a much longer time than with our mother tongue — and why it is so hard to get rid of our accent, which is none other than that of our mother. That is also why old people who find it hard to learn new concepts or words, who may not remember where they left the TV remote control, can remember the first time they got lost and couldn’t find their mother, or the first time they went to school, or perhaps even the lyrics of the songs they listened to in their earliest childhood. What neurons acquire when we are children or babies thus becomes an indelible and forged basis. A greater reason, then, for this to happen at the very moment of birth.
The nervous system, and in particular the brain, works electrochemically and, therefore, cannot be unaffected by the influence of electromagnetic fields on our neurons. The sun is the most powerful source of electromagnetic radiation in our vicinity. Its influence radiates to us in the form of an electromagnetic force field, which is expressed in the so-called “Faraday lines”, the typical curves that form on a sheet of paper when a magnet is placed underneath it and iron filings are sprinkled on it. Neurons interact with each other through electrochemical bonds that connect neurons — dendrites with axons — and are configured by different action potentials of these connections, which can be modelled by so-called “synaptic weights”. By linking all these concepts together it is possible to conjecture an influence of the Faraday lines of the sun on our synaptic weights which are hardwired during birth, and condition us to develop a certain type of personality rather than another.
From this perspective, the division of the zodiac into 12 houses is entirely arbitrary and could well have been done differently, for example by subdividing the annual cycle into 365 days, each of which would be a “sun sign” in its own right. However, the differences between a person born on, say, the 150th day compared to a person born on the 151st day would be so subtle that such a fine subdivision would not be justified. On the other hand, as a consequence of this conjecture, there should be a continuous spectrum of solar influences on the nervous system, so that a person born on the day of adjacency of two contiguous signs should have characteristics of both signs. The latter is strongly denied by traditional astrology, which states that personality differences within the same sign are due to other factors such as the moon sign and the “ascendant” (the astrological sign that is ascending on the eastern horizon during birth). In contrast, from this scientific perspective of astrology, the concepts of ascendant and moon sign have no place, since neither the moon, much less the ascendant, generate an electromagnetic field with Faraday lines that can influence the electrochemistry of the brain. Finally, the most radical and relevant difference that we can establish between this “scientific astrology” — or “neoastrology” — and the traditional one is that the first does not allow us to predict the future; it is not useful to know if we are going to win the Lottery!
Science is a dynamic activity and, therefore, scientific truths are subject to constant revision. This might seem to be a handicap but it is, on the contrary, a virtue. For example, Albert Einstein’s Theory of Relativity told us that information could not travel faster than light, but we now know that it can and — what’s more — it happens all the time, through a mechanism called “quantum entanglement”. Perhaps, in the future, neoastrology, which is currently no more than a mere conjecture, may become a hypothesis and eventually be proven as a valid scientific theory. We don’t know that, but for the time being, I will continue to believe in it, as long as it is not proven wrong. Consequently, I will continue to study signs, as I have discovered in this knowledge a very powerful tool for effective communication and increased empathy in interpersonal relationships.
