- by Juan Revilla
chaos theory
During the late 80's and early 90's, it was mathematically demonstrated that in just a few million years (5 to 10 million depending on the study) the solar system becomes chaotic, which left behind the old assumption about the stability of the system. This was added to the realization that the solar system "floats" amidst an ocean of orbit-crossing asteroids with very unstable orbits, and has resulted in a transformation of the vision that astronomers have of the solar system. The traditional view of asteroids as members of the belt between Mars and Jupiter, with very stable orbits, is now superseded and a more complex and unpredictable (in the very long range) picture has emerged in which the cometary asteroids --unrelated to the main Jupiter/Mars belt-- play a decisive role.
This transformation has gone parallel to the weakening or actual crumbling of ideological systems which pretended to explain the whole of human existence and the universe. "Classical astrology" (?) is one of such "complete" systems of the world, and is being challenged by a new vision of the solar system (chaotic, unstable, populated by swarms of asteroids crossing it in all its extension) to incorporate modern concepts, such as chaos and complexity theory, and the realization that schemes exist everywhere but must be broken and give way to creativity and new forms of thinking.
The word "chaos", as it is used in modern science, does not imply "disorder" as is usually assumed: it implies that it is not possible to make long-range accurate predictions of the behavior of complex systems, because the movement or flow is not periodic or quasi-periodic, but appears to be ruled by irregular and apparently erratic fluctuations. This does not mean the absence of order or of form; in fact, chaotic systems show a stunning fluidity of form, such as in fractals or in flowing water; it simply means that order cannot be easily discerned or predicted, in spite of the admirable grandeur and beauty of its forms.
A clear and deliberate application of chaos theory is found in the film "Jurassic Park". The controlled reproduction of female dinosaurs in such a way that it made impossible their breeding outside the laboratory went out of control in a short period of time. The paleontologists invited to admire the project soon realized, and the philosopher/mathematician warned --smiling but visibly alarmed and irritated by the naiveté and ignorance of the laboratory engineers--, that "nature always finds its way".
The scientists and philosophers understood the problem from the start, and a clear distinction was made between them and the genetic engineers that managed and developed the project. From this point of view, classical and traditional astrologers differ very little from the engineers.
Chaos theory goes hand in hand with complexity theory, and constitutes the next evolutionary step in the modern scientific worldview, after the relativity and quantum physics of the previous decades. This is specially evident in the study of biological, social, and organizational phenomena. It represents a qualitative leap in the natural sciences from a mechanical paradigm based on causality to a new, organical paradigm that transcends it.
prejudices against the new
TThe "classical" world went up to Saturn. Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto are not "classical", they are (or were) new. If we are going to reject the new simply because it is possible to keep working adequately with the old, then, with this argument, we better not use the trans-Saturnian planets, because they are new. Who defines what is classic and what is not?
Incorporating the new is not easy. Each astrologer defines in the course of time and through accumulated experience the particular way of understanding or of incorporating the new in his or her vision of things. Even today, there are many different attitudes and ways of understanding the role of Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto in modern astrology with respect to the older planets. Do they add new symbolism? Or do they just require and adaptation of the ancient code, a re-ordering of meanings? Is Saturn the same after the incorporation of Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto? Or has the meaning of Saturn transformed, suffered important changes?
It is the same process in the case of asteroids, except that the new is now added potentiated and more challenging, because it is about bodies with physical and orbital characteristics which are different to those of the conventional planets.
- :::continued next page:::