Log in

13 November 2009 @ 12:49 am
Please read about my research:  
I will listen carefully to all your comments.

Abstract: Some inexplicable statistical variations in Nobel Prize laureates natal data are reported and discussed, and additional data is examined afterward. The observed strong correlation with Quaoar position (+5.69 standard deviations) is probably caused by correlation of Quaoar position with an unknown non-trivial solar, lunar or terrestrial cycle. It is well known that some space weather conditions influence human health, but the possibility of influence on long-term physiological and/or psychological characteristics since birth is still under question. If observed on other similar data, e.g. Wolf Prize laureates or Ramon Magsaysay awardees, the effect can be considered astroanthropological. Otherwise this study will help to better understand the reasons of astrological and similar beliefs, and to prevent circulation of such anti-scientific beliefs in future.

Comments: All databases and the source code are included.
I know that the majority of physicists and astronomers would say that these data don't make sense and therefore can't be correct. Though other examples of inexplicable data are well known, e.g. Pioneer anomaly, the Kuiper cliff, the Eridanus Supervoid.

Where could this article be published? If you have any idea, please share.
at the still point: blankmodlin on November 13th, 2009 06:49 pm (UTC)

This reminds me of Richard Feynman on license plates: “You know, the most amazing thing happened to me tonight. I was coming here, on the way to the lecture, and I came in through the parking lot. And you won’t believe what happened. I saw a car with the license plate ARW 357. Can you imagine? Of all the millions of license plates in the state, what was the chance that I would see that particular one tonight? Amazing!” There are infinite sets of unrelated data in the universe, and some of them are bound to be correlated. Apparently you've found such a set.

See also, Occam's Razor.
geckipede on November 13th, 2009 09:18 pm (UTC)
Are you comparing the dates against a simple does/does not meet the condition? Or are you doing the analysis of rate of births against the value for closeness of angle?

If the former, the 6 degrees cutoff point is rather arbitrary and extremely wide when applied to so many objects.
James Gunasekerajamesgunasekera on November 21st, 2009 04:42 am (UTC)
Thanks for your comments!
Further research: http://vixra.org/abs/0911.0053

the ROFLBOT comment will be deleted on November 30th, okay?