kallis@pen.DEC (08/05/85)
The last few postings have included pros and cons of astrological software. There has been a lot of heat and very little light on the subject. Let's try to minimize this, please? 1) Whether one speaks of astronomy or astrology, geocentric planetary position programs can be useful. Ask any celestial navigator. 2) Astrology is a belief (not necessarily a religion) that goes back at least to the Babylonian priests. That it was a protoscience has little to do with the matter: pretelescopic (pre)astronomy concerned itself with a lot of attention to planetary positions, and since people weren't even sure just what planets *were*, what their purpose was (if any) was subject to cultural biases of the time. At one time, recall, being able to predict an eclipse was considered bordering on the supernatural. 3) There is certainly a place for "net.astrology" if one wishes to follow the discipline (note: "discipline" has no connotation about _validity_; it merely involves doing things systematically). 4) To the extent that something from one discipline can be used in another, there's no reason _not_ to use astrological programs for things such as planetary observations. 5) From what I understand, there is research being done in something that can't exactly be called astrology -- "neoastrology," perhaps? -- that throws out the Babylonian stuff but investigates subtle tidal influences. I haven't studied it myself (nor have any desire to do so), but read an article written by ne of the co-investigators (who _doesn't_ believe in the paranormal) concerning an analysis of an example of one of the theories that showed something interestingly anomalous, and how the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Paranormal Phenomena (or whatever -- the group Carl Sagan and Phil Klass are members of) reacted to it emotionally rather than as scientists. It's interesting reading, and it appeared (as a last resort) in the pro-paranormal magazine _Fate_ a few years ago under the title of "sTARBABY." 6) Namecalling, whether of people or ideas, does nothing but make the other guy angry, without really making the namecaller feel better. In summation: let's agree that this is "net.astronomy" and as such should primarily stick to astroNOMical subjects. However, if someone offers an astrological program an amateur or professional astronomer can find use- ful for their astroNOMical work, nobody should throw brickbats for somone being so kind as making the offer. Stephen A. Kallis, Jr. P.S.: Epicycles and deferents were clumsier than Keplerian ellipses, but they could be used as good models until something better came along. SK