Modern astrology's evaluation of astrology

Modern science generally judges astrology as pseudoscience. Criticism of astrology includes: relying on conjecture, unable to provide hypothesis, difficult to falsify, and describing natural phenomena with supernatural reasons that modern science cannot prove. Some studies believe that the continued popularity of astrology can be explained as a cognitive prejudice through psychological methods. For example, most astrologers think that all planets should be considered in astrology, but because of the mistakes in the star map, they failed to predict the existence of Neptune. The existence of Neptune was finally confirmed by Newton's law of universal gravitation.

In addition to the defects of astrology mentioned above, from the perspective of natural science history or science, an ordinary science always tries to sum up the laws of nature, and it should simplify what happens in nature into some relatively clear rules that can explain these things. If a natural science has to use more and more rules to explain the phenomena it observes during its development (for example, geocentric theory introduces more eccentric wheels to explain the differences of planetary orbits), then it often shows that this science is entering a wrong path. On the other hand, astrology has been adding more and more rules since its birth, so that today its rules are so complicated that even professional astrologers can't list them one by one.

Besides, there is no physical theory to explain how the position of celestial bodies affects people's fate. Some people say that the gravity of the stars can affect a person, but in fact, what are the walls, doors and windows of the hospital where a person was born? The change of gravity may be greater than that of all stars in the universe. Therefore, most natural scientists believe that astrology is a pseudoscience.

1975, American 186 famous scientists (including 18 Nobel Prize winners) published a joint article in Humanist magazine criticizing astrology, calling it pseudoscience.

Stephen Hawking said in a speech on 200 1: "Most scientists don't believe in astrology because it doesn't conform to the scientific theory proved by experiments." In the book Quantum of Astrology, physicist Ding Zhiliang constantly uses the viewpoint of theoretical physical model and contemporary current events to verify the correctness of Astrology. The experimental basis of astrology is at least equivalent to astrophysics and economics.

Nowadays, Barnum effect is often used to explain the phenomenon of personality prediction in astrology.