-
- MW:
Greetings, Professor Dr. Strolog!
-
- PS:
Good morning, Mr. Wagner!
-
- MW:
I’ve heard that you’re a professor of extraterrestrial
astrology. Could you
explain for a babe in the woods like me what that exactly means?
-
- PS:
Of
course! It has to do with
the most interesting and for me, the soundest area of astrological
research, that is, the interpretation of the stars, as applied to
other heavenly bodies such as our Earth.
-
- MW:
What???
-
- PS:
Yes, you heard right! I’m
researching by means of computer simulation the astrological
relationship of the planets outside the Earth.
-
- MW:
And why?
-
- PS:
Well, the world’s population is increasing more and more, and
there are already more than six billion people.
By the time there are between 10 and 15 billion, we should
reach the natural limit. Mankind
must then establish like it or not colonies on other planets or moons in order
to survive.
-
- MW:
And what sort of contribution are you making?
-
- PS:
To the extent possible, I’m trying to provide a basis for
calculating all kinds of horoscopes for these heavenly bodies.
Everyone has a right to an accurate horoscope, and that must
continue in the future!
-
- MW:
And when do you think that mankind will have settlements on
other planets?
-
- PS:
Well, let’s proceed logically.
The moon landing was in 1969, and NASA is planning on a
manned Mars landing in 2019 to celebrate the 50th
anniversary, with the goal of long-term settlement.
That presupposes that the Moon will already be settled, of
course. I calculate
there will be the first permanent Moon colony around 2015.
The first Mars colony should be established then about 2040.
Progress will proceed faster and faster.
-
- MW:
And so you’re preparing horoscopes for future Mars
inhabitants!
-
- PS:
No, not really – I’m only providing the theoretical basis
for them. Future
astrologers must calculate them for themselves.
However, for example, I am calculating the modified Zodiac or
planetary aspects, etc.
-
- MW:
That really sounds complicated.
Give us an example!
-
- PS:
Well in theory, it’s really quite simple.
Let’s stick with the Moon.
Here, you just have to replace the influence of the Moon with
the influence of the Earth. This
is theoretically just a trivial matter!
-
- MW:
And how is that going?
-
- PS:
Well, you’re surely familiar with the lunar calendar. It tells us, for example, when we should go the
hairdresser’s, fly away on vacation, change jobs, undergo surgery,
get married, get divorced, or have children.
You simply have to replace the Moon’s influence with the
Earth’s, and presto! – you have it.
It’s really nothing more than a two-body problem from
theoretical physics. It’s trivial!
-
- MW:
And you’ve calculated this?
-
- PS:
Of course not, I haven’t even started on it.
I’ve just turned my attention to Mars.
The Moon is simply too trivial, and I simply don’t have the
time for such a thing. Let
others do it!
-
- MW:
You could give it to your students as a research project for
their degree …
-
- PS:
Yes, that’s a good idea.
I have one who’s in line to get a D; it’d be ideal for
him. But let’s get
back to Mars!
-
- MW:
Well, Mars was the Greek and Roman god of war.
Wouldn’t that result in a permanent state of war?
-
- PS:
Theoretically you’re right
But thanks to Earth, that will never be the case.
-
- MW:
Why not?
-
- PS:
Earth is the planet of life and symbol of peace.
That will work against the Martian warlike influence.
-
- MW:
Earth, the symbol of life and peace?
I never heard that from any astrologer!
-
- PS:
And you never will! After
all, we live on Earth. Conventional
astrology pays no heed to its influence, since it’s a constant.
It simply drops out of the calculation.
-
- MW:
Yes, but if Earth is the symbol of life and peace, why is
there so much war and death?
-
- PS:
Well, you ought to be able to answer that question yourself!
Wars are a result of the influence of Mars and death from the
influence of Pluto. Pluto
is the god of the underworld, so life is impossible there.
-
- MW:
I see - I thought it was because it was so cold there. But back to Mars. There
must be many more wars there than here!
-
- PS:
Yes, of course. Mars
is only partly protected by Earth, and that also depends greatly on
the relative position of the planets with respect to each other.
When Mars is close to us, then peace reigns. However, when it’s in conjunction with the Sun, then things
get serious. Earth’s
influence wanes dramatically, which is the case every other year.
-
- MW:
Then Mars isn’t really suitable for a long-term settlement,
or is it?
-
- PS:
No, not necessarily. You
see that my research is absolutely significant!
And it’s not really different with the other planets. But there are some interesting exceptions – Jupiter, for
instance.
-
- MW:
And why is that?
-
- PS:
Well, just consider its four Galilean moons.
They clearly fend off the negative influences from Mars and
Pluto.
-
- MW:
Then life must be possible on Jupiter?
-
- PS:
Yes, theoretically. But
Jupiter is unfortunately king of the planets, and simply can’t
stand having anyone with him, you must understand.
Theoretically, you’re right.
However, it’s conceivable that there could possibly be life
on one of the Jovian moons. But
then you have to take into account the influence of Jupiter and its
remaining moons.
-
- MW:
This problem, then, is certainly not as trivial as is the
case with Earth’s moon!
-
- PS:
No, not entirely. I’ve
put a doctoral candidate on this case, and he should be finished
with it soon.
-
- MW:
What about the other planets?
How about Mercury, Venus, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune?
Does each one have its own astrology?
-
- PS:
Only with respect to influences from neighboring planets. But the same holds true for the Zodiac – the stars are
light-years away from our solar system, so it changes nothing.
-
- MW:
So Aries’ impact on Saturn is the same as it is on Earth?
-
- PS:
In theory, yes, but the point of Spring lies elsewhere. But you’ve provided me with an interesting example - Saturn
…
-
- MW:
How so?
-
- PS:
Well, due to love, Saturn assumes a place of prominence. Whoever enters into a relationship there is bound forever
to it. There is
no divorce there!
-
- MW:
Why is that so, if you will?
-
- PS:
Why, due to Saturn’s rings, of course!
They’re the symbol of eternal fidelity.
Once married, always married!
You’d better think it over carefully if you get involved
with a hot-blooded Saturnian!
-
- MW:
Hum, yes … Well, I’d prefer an Earthling bride then! However, I’m naturally for lifelong fidelity, too.
But a Saturnian, I don’t know … On the other hand,
you’ve now given me a nice insight into your research.
-
- PS:
Slow down, slow down! We’ve
only talked about our own solar system this whole time.
We’re just approaching the realm of extrasolar astrology.
-
- MW:
I see! Yes, this
must be exciting, as I imagine.
Our Milky Way, with its billions and billions of stars and
planets. Well, your
doctoral students must certainly have a lot to do!
-
- PS:
Well, I only let competent people do this – there’s a lot
of calculation work involved! You
have to consider all the stars, planets and moons … this is only
for top-notch researchers. I
can’t entrust it to just any run-of-the mill, incompetent
astrologers. I must
therefore take most of the work upon myself.
Some things are also changing there.
-
- MW:
Could you give me an example?
-
- PS:
Sure. You have
to distinguish between the astrology of stars close to our Sun and
those many light-years away. Take
Sirius in Canis Major, for instance, which is about 9 light-years
from us. Once you set
aside the planets and moons, not much changes.
The Zodiac is theoretically always the same.
-
- MW:
It must be quite a different story on Aldebaran.
-
- PS:
Yes, and for two reasons! First of all, Aldebaran is
significantly further away, and secondly, it’s part of the
constellation Taurus, the Bull.
-
- MW:
We’d all be steers on Aldebaran?
-
- PS:
No, once again, you’re not thinking this through.
No one would be a steer there.
There are completely different astrological signs there.
But in one sense, you are right:
we’d all have a bull-like background ….
-
- MW: In Taurus,
there are also two well-known star clusters:
the Pleiades and the Hyaides.
How do they fit into all of this?
-
- PS:
That’s indeed very interesting.
There, the interactions of the planets around the individual
stars are much more intensive.
This is a highly complex domain of research.
It already pushes the load limits of our mainframe computers.
And naturally, you must differentiate between open and
globular star clusters …
-
- MW:
Yes, M13 in Hercules, for instance, which I have already
photographed myself. In
my 10” telescope, it looks absolutely fantastic!
-
- PS:
The type of star cluster is reflected again in the mentality
of its inhabitants. The
inhabitants of the Pleiades and Hyaides, which are of course open
star clusters, are theoretically very open-minded and tolerant.
Inhabitants of globular star clusters tend to be rather
cloistered.
-
- MW:
But why are you spending any time on this?
Surely no one will ever fly there!
-
- PS:
Never say never! Our
technology is making tremendous progress, particularly in space
travel. I estimate that in 150 years, we’ll be that far.
We must, therefore, work out the astrological foundations
before then!
-
- MW:
But that’s a long way off from now. Your son could take
care of that, couldn’t he?
-
- PS:
On the one hand, yes; on the other hand, no.
Just consider for a moment the domain of dynamic astrology!
There’s too much left to do!
-
- MW:
Dynamic astrology??? What’s that?
-
- PS:
Well, just consider this.
If you’re in a spaceship flying around the speed of light,
the signs of the Zodiac also change over the course of time.
That’s what I call dynamic astrology.
And if you want to take into account all the flight routes
between the individual stars, even that takes time!
-
- MW:
Well, when I think about that, I really wouldn’t want to be
your son…
-
- PS:
No, that’s not meant for my son.
I’d rather take care of it myself until I reach emeritus
status. My son will then take on the wide domain of extragalactic
astrology.
-
- MW:
Extragalactic astrology?
You mean astrology beyond our Milky Way?
-
- PS:
Yes, of course. We
simply cannot leave these countless creatures to their own fate.
-
- MW:
But your supercomputers are pushing their limits, aren’t
they?
-
- PS:
Yes, far and away. That’s
why I’ve also passed this along to my son.
He’ll have access to efficient quantum computers by then.
With these tools, he would surely be overtaxed.
And just think about the required telescopes.
In order to determine the positions of individual stars in
the various Milky Way systems, we need telescopes with the diameter
of the Earth’s circumference to guarantee a sufficiently high
power of resolution. And
these are currently not available.
-
- MW:
And certainly never will be …
-
- PS:
Stop, stop, not so fast!
In theory, none of this a problem.
You simply put out a telescope in the space around the world,
and another a half year later.
Then you only have to interconnect them optically and presto
- you’re done. But
this is only sensible with respect to the resolution, not the light
magnitude. You’d
naturally never be able to make out a black hole with it.
-
- MW:
Calculating horoscopes out there wouldn’t make any sense
anyway, as no life whatsoever would exist …
-
- PS:
Precisely! Black
holes also swallow up in particular the signs of the Zodiac in their
vicinity. This is the
essential reason why no life is possible there.
But today’s physics simply does not want to take note of
this.
-
- MW:
Well, thank you for your statements.
Perhaps we’ll meet again one day, when you’re further
along with your research …
-
- PS:
Just a moment, just a moment!
I’d like to give you some insights into the domain of
extra-universe astrology.
-
- MW:
Sure, of course. Astrological
research outside the Universities … well, there surely must be a
lot of black sheep romping about who don’t come close to having
the same intellectual capacity as you, Professor!
-
- PS:
Well, Mr. Wagner, you’re still only using your limited
understanding. By
extra-universe astrology, I mean of course astrology outside of our
universe!!!
-
- MW:
Outside … our … universe????
-
- PS:
Yes, logically! Many
of my conventional colleagues agree that there are a series of
parallel universes. And
they all want to be related to one another, universe to universe,
galaxy to galaxy, star to star, planet to planet … And then all
the moons and comets. And
don’t forget all the dark matter!
-
- MW:
You mean these quantum computers can handle all that???
-
- PS:
Certainly not. Quantum
computers work only at the speed of light.
In fact, you’ll need tachyon computers then.
And that’s still a ways off …
-
- MW:
Tachyon computers???
-
- PS:
Yes, of course! Tachyons
are better known as superluminal particles.
Normal particles have the speed of light as an upper limit;
tachyons as a lower. It’s
so simple.
-
- MW:
With which we finally reach the limits of astrology…
-
- PS:
Well, almost, at least.
I was going to bring up eschatological astrology.
-
- MW:
The what?
-
- PS:
Eschatological astronomy, of course.
Eschatology is better known as the doctrine of last things.
Each planet has its otherworldly spheres – paradise, realm
of the dead, etc. And
whose inhabitants after all also want to get their personal
horoscope calculated every week.
However, as no tachyon computer is capable of that, we
already need an escaton computer.
According to my theory, escatons are the carrier particles of
telepathic interaction. They
form the foundation of full communication in otherworldly spheres.
This interaction is carried out differently than with
tachyons, always with infinite speed.
-
- MW:
Well, Professor, that really reaches the top!
Don’t you think that at this point, you’ve finally
penetrated the domain of the occult?
-
- PS:
No, not at all. This
is just as occult or non-occult as conventional astrology.
You understand, I’m just a man who wants to know
everything. I simply
want to get to the bottom of things.
-
- MW:
Professor, thanks very much for your concluding statement. I’ll publish your interview soon on my homepage.
I’m curious what your colleagues of conventional astrology
will have to say about your theses!
-
-
- Martin
Wagner, 23 March 2002
|
