Pilot Study of Predicting the Timing of Events Using Horary Astrology Methods

By Aleksei Borealis, MSc

Abstract

While previous research into astrological predictions mainly focussed on natal astrology (Ridgley 1993; Tarvainen 2014; Klein 1993), horary astrology, which aims to predict the outcomes of daily events, has not been thoroughly tested.

A group of independent astrologers is conducting this research to confirm or refute the hypothesis that astrological forecasts of timing in horary astrology are random guesses. This is a pilot study in which a group of astrologers and a control group of random individuals made eleven predictions, each under completely identical initial conditions, with outcomes that could not be influenced. We are interested in only one metric—the deviation of the predicted time from the actual time of the event’s realization.

This pilot study’s task is to compare how much less astrologers err in indicating the timing of events compared to ordinary people.

The null hypothesis is that the errors of astrologers and random individuals differ insignificantly. The result showed that astrologers surpassed random individuals in accuracy by 3.5 standard deviations, i.e., Cohen's d = 3.5, which is a large effect size. The difference in predictive accuracy between the two groups is highly significant (p < .00001) and is unlikely to be explained by chance.

1. Events Under Examination

In this study, it is important to define the concept of a “forecasted event.” In real life, an event is the simultaneous occurrence of a vast number of elementary outcomes. For instance, a person being fired from a job assumes various conditions: being dismissed in written form, the order being signed at a specific minute on a certain type and quality of paper, the atmospheric pressure at that moment being a certain value, and so on. However, from an astrological standpoint, we forecast and subsequently measure only one aspect of this complex system—the individual’s state of being fired or retained at a specific moment in time. Other parameters are not part of the forecast and are not subject to verification.

It's also essential to note that by “the occurrence of an event,” we mean the direct encounter of the individual with the forecasted event. For instance, in the case of predicting dismissal, it’s not the moment of signing the order or leaving the office but the moment when the person first learns about the dismissal.

Usually, the context of the question within which an astrologer makes a forecast clearly defines which observable parameter of life is subject to prediction. For example, if a woman enquires about the date of her pregnancy, the astrologer specifies the date when the woman learns about the pregnancy. If the question is about the date of the child’s birth, it refers to the moment of the child's arrival, and so forth.

2. Terminological Basis

In the scope of this research, we'll be using the following definitions:

• Measurable Parameter: This is part of an event voiced in the forecast and can be objectively verified. For example, a forecasted event like “dismissal with an unexpectedly substantial compensation” implies two parameters—dismissal and compensation payout.

• Elementary Outcome: These are discrete values that the measurable parameters can take. The discrete value of “true/false” for the occurrence or non-occurrence of an elementary outcome can be unequivocally verified.

  It's fair to say that in astrological forecasts, there exist descriptions of outcomes whose unambiguous verification seems impossible. For instance, an astrological forecast might include qualitative descriptions such as “abundant/moderate precipitation,” “significantly high/low temperature,” and “stout/slim individual.” For example, in the forecast “dismissal with an unexpectedly substantial compensation,” there are three parameters—dismissal, compensation payout, and the amount of compensation (in the case of payout). Dismissal and payout can take two discrete and verifiable values of “true/false,” whereas the compensation amount can assume three qualitative values—“substantial/moderate/small (relative to the current position)”—and doesn't appear straightforward to measure.

  For the sake of purity in verification, we excluded forecasts from the sample that contained such qualitative descriptions of future events.

• The Expected Interval of Event Occurrence. This is the period during which we expect the predicted event to occur. We proceed from two assumptions:
  1. The event must occur within the specified time interval.

  2. The event is equally likely to occur within the specified interval on any day.

     The context of the question determines the expected time interval. For example, if an astrologer predicts the date of death of a cancer patient who (according to doctors) has no more than five months to live, then we set the expected interval to five months.

• Normalized Deviation of the Forecasted Date from the Actual Date of the Event. This is the difference between the predicted and actual dates of the event occurrence, divided by the number of units (days or hours) in the expected interval of event realization. For example, suppose an astrologer says an event should occur within the next two weeks on the 4th of November, and the event happens on the 6th of November. In that case, the deviation is 2/14 = 14%. We will also refer to this metric as the normalized timing error in the prediction.

3. Research Conditions

3.1. Homogeneity of the Sample of Tested Astrological Methods

To maintain uniformity in the astrological tools under examination, we selected astrologers who employed the same forecasting method (known as traditional 17th-century horary astrology, (Lilly 1659; Frawley, 2014), and horoscope validation¹ before making a forecast).

N.B.: Astrologers cannot apply the horary forecasting tools to all horary questions. If that were the case, horary astrologers would have long become wealthy, placing bets in casinos or consistently closing short positions in trading. This is why astrologers thoroughly examined each horary chart on radicality (i.e., the presence of an answer about the future event) before accepting the question.

All the astrologers are not psychic in other areas, and they arrived at conclusions through a rational path, following the horoscope and strict logical rules without relying on intuition. They are experts in their field, actively practise astrology, and solely engage in event forecasting.

Fellow astrologers, participating in experiment:

1. Anna Pavlova
2. Mykola Kupriianov
3. Aleksei Borealis
4. Marina Ambrosimov

3.2. Sample Size

The careful verification of horary charts for radicality before accepting them explains the small sample size (only 11 forecasts), as horary astrology cannot provide accurate answers to all questions.

Thus the study is a pilot and does not claim to be a full-scale statistical research of the entire field of predictive astrology.

However, carefully selecting question subjects does not make the sample heterogeneous. Horary charts can equally contain or not contain an answer about the future, regardless of the sphere of prediction.

3.3. Sample Selection of Forecasted Objects

We did not impose restrictions on the selection of forecasted objects, assuming that horary astrology methods are equally effective across all spheres of human life. The effectiveness of their application does not depend on the object of prediction, much like measuring the weight of stones using identical scales regardless of the stones' shapes or colours.

3.4. Information Equivalence

Astrologers and the control group of individuals used precisely the same information when guessing the timing of events. Astrologers did not use natal charts, psychic abilities, or other means besides horary charts to calculate event timings. The control group received the same introductory information about each predicted event as the astrologers.

3.5. Forecast Requirements

All the astrological forecasts in this study were documented strictly before the predicted events occurred or failed to occur.

The primary forecast requirements were:

1. Objective verifiability of predicted events. Forecasts should not include descriptions of subjective experiences or abstract immeasurable quantities such as “he will love you,” “there will be improvements,” “a period of instability,” and similar terms. Nor should they contain ambiguously verifiable factors like “high income” or “reduced price.” All forecasts had very clear formulations, including descriptions of the verifiable details. For instance, in response to a question like “How will relationships develop?” an astrologer might forecast that exactly 2.5 weeks later, the client would discover his wife's infidelity in their home, followed by a divorce. In this formulation, we are interested in the first part of the forecast—“in 2.5 weeks (on such-and-such a date), you will discover your wife's infidelity.”
2. An obligatory criterion was the presence of both fulfilled and unfulfilled forecasts within the period, as well as the absence of concealing unfulfilled forecasts.

3.6. Self-Fulfilling Forecasts Exclusion

We excluded all forecasts that could be considered self-fulfilling and retained only those where the outcome of the forecast was independent of the person receiving the forecast.

4. Important Note Regarding the Timing Prediction Method

Since readers unfamiliar with horary astrology may find it strange that astrologers specify very different time frames—ranging from a few hours to several months with specific dates—we consider it necessary to remark on the astrological timing determination method briefly.

In horary astrology, the positions of the planets at the current moment are such that the angular distances between the planets indicate the number of periodic celestial processes that will occur before the event happens.

These celestial cycles include, for example:

• The number of Earth's rotations on its axis (number of days)
• The number of lunar phase changes (number of weeks)
• The number of Earth's revolutions around the Sun (number of years), and so on.

Thus, the astrologer determines the time units (hours, days, weeks, etc.) and the number of these units until the event occurs. Therefore, the predictions result in values such as thirteen days, five weeks, four hours, etc.

5. Assumptions and Approximations

5.1. Assumptions Regarding Normal Distribution

Due to the lack of grounds to assume otherwise, we believe that the results of the guesses by the astrologers and the random individuals follow a normal distribution.

According to our best knowledge, experiment participants do not tend to systematically predict the timing closer to the end or the beginning of the time interval within which the event will happen.

6. Problem Statement

A group of astrologers makes eleven predictions with normalised deviations between the predicted and actual timings equal to $x_1$, $x_2$, $x_3$ ... $x_\text{11}.$

Under the same conditions, a group of random individuals also makes eleven predictions. The group consists of ten individuals, each making eleven forecasts, demonstrating, on average, normalised deviations $y_1$, $y_2$, $y_3$ ... $y_\text{11}.$

The null hypothesis is that the mean errors of the astrologers and the random individuals differ insignificantly.

We use a one-tailed t-test for two independent groups to test this hypothesis. We also calculated Cohen’s $d$ with a pooled standard deviation.

7. Research Results

We had the following sample of astrological forecasts with normalised timing errors for two groups at our disposal. The table below indicates $x$—the deviations between the prediction and reality in the group of astrologers, and $y$—the same deviations in the group of random individuals.

Table 1
The Sample of 11 Forecasts of Future Events with Timings

First, we conducted Levene's test to ensure that there were no significant differences in variances in both datasets. We used the Python library Scipy with Levene's built-in test function.

The $p$-value result was .015, less than the statistically significant threshold of .05. Thus we did not find substantial variances between the two datasets.

Then we computed the value for our t-test. It was 8.31, much greater than the critical value of 2.086 for the degree of freedom, $df$ = 20. In this case, the $p$-value was 6.34E-08.

Finally, we calculated the Size Effect, Cohen's $d$, with a pooled standard deviation (Currey, 2022). It was 3.5, which is a very large value. It means that the difference in accuracy between astrologers and the random group is larger than three pooled standard deviations — it is substantial.

8. Conclusions

Due to the small sample size, this project is considered a pilot and should be regarded as suggestive. However, the results we obtained give us grounds to hope that subsequent experiments with more extensive statistical coverage will demonstrate the outstanding abilities of horary astrology in predicting accurate event timings.

We also believe that this study demonstrates the following important fact about horary astrology: it is suitable for scientific verification according to Karl Popper’s criteria (Popper, 1934)

9. Acknowledgments

The author expresses gratitude to fellow astrologers who participated in the experiment: Anna Pavlova, Mykola Kupriianov and Marina Ambrosimova. He also thanks Dr Kyösti Tarvainen and Professor Glenn Mitchell for suggestions and advice on this paper.

10. References

1. Lilly, W. (1659) Christian Astrology. Printed by John Macock.
2. Frawley, J. (2014) The Horary Textbook. Apprentice Books.
3. Popper, K. (1934) Logik der Forschung. Zur Erkenntnistheorie der modernen Naturwissenschaft. Julius Springer, Wien.
4. Tarvainen, K., (2014) Effects of Venus/Saturn aspects in marriages, Correlation 28(2) pp.7-14.
5. Ridgley, Sara Klein. (1993) Astrologically Predictable Patterns in Work-Related Injuries, Kosmos. XXII [3], 1993, pp.21-30.
6. Currey, R. (2022) Meta-Analysis of Recent Advances in Natal Astrology using a universal Effect Size. Correlation 34(2) pp.51-53.

---

¹ Horoscope validation is a technical procedure to ascertain the ability to make a prediction. This procedure, known as "checking the radicality of a chart," is performed by an astrologer before applying forecasting techniques. ↩