This web site offers postulation, evidence, and discourse regarding three problems that astrological theory needs to answer:

1. What is the physical correspondence between the individual and the celestial environment that surrounds the individual? This theory would develop mathematical structures based on natural symmetries that account for astrological data and observations.


2. What are the essential operations of the signs, houses, aspects, and planets when reduced to definitive meanings? This theory would develop a taxonomy and an astrological science of inquiry that would account for empirical evidence and significance.


3. What is the psychological mechanism of astrological interpretation? This theory would develop the assessment of astrological patterns and dynamics. It would draw upon the fuzzy logic of astrological wisdom and divination.

Many people today believe that science rejects astrology because it does not present a causal mechanism similar to the classical models of Standard Theory, which would operate between the celestial system and the individual. Astrology does not use a mechanistic model but instead uses a model that is based on symmetry. In standard physics the universe has no center. In astrology the individual is the center of the universe and there are as many universes as there are individuals. The ancient Hermetic maxim states: "As above, so below." The inner world of the individual is symmetrically related to the outer world of the celestial environment. This model of symmetry is a scientific view, which allows for experimental hypotheses, empirical observations, and the evaluation of data.

Evidence of this type of symmetry is found in hologram fragments. Each fragment contains a pattern that is an image of the whole. Another example is the so-called "self-similarity" found in fractal geometries, in which the same shapes or patterns, such as Mandelbrot or Julia sets, are repeated at different scales within a fractal environment. Although they are not recognized as such, these are symmetries, and they fall into the category of what may be called cosmic symmetry. The behaviors of microcosms are reflected in the behaviors of their macrocosms and vice versa. Within an environment, behaviors implement cosmic symmetry.

Although relatively inconspicuous compared to other symmetries, cosmic symmetry is nonetheless a feature that is found throughout nature, and this natural feature seems to have gone unacknowledged by science for the past 400 years.

While it can be said that people, social dynamics, and events influence each other through their interactions, and that planets and stars have properties because they are objects, it cannot not be said that planets and stars directly influence people, society, or events, because there is no direct interaction between them. However, if people and events reflect celestial objects by a type of symmetry as astrology purports (i.e. as above—so below), then the planetary or stellar "influence" is indirect. It comes from the individuals and events that influence—or try to influence—each other while diachronically reflecting astrological properties.

This is why it is best to think of celestial objects as having astrological properties rather than astrological influence. Being ambiguous, the latter can be construed to mean direct physical influence, animism, determinism, and other needless associations beyond social influence among individuals. Thinking in terms of properties instead of influences relieves researchers of the unfortunate semantic burden of assumed causal interactions where none are suggested. Free of this burden, researchers can carry on with their work, which is based on mapping principles, which everyone, in principle, can agree to.

It is not so important to know how celestial objects come to have astrological properties or how symmetries operate. These are simply things that are empirically observed, like any other properties or behaviors in nature. Researchers should be circumspect in their language to infer astrological properties and behavior through symmetrically diachronic observations of influences among individuals and events.