Display posts from previous
Sort by

73 by lisa
Olivia wrote:
aglaya wrote:. I was, perhaps perversely, delighted, to see a deliberately wrong birth time I'd started saying turn up in a Very Respectable Book on natal charts once, with either an A or AA rating :D

.
This fascinating discussion has now become even more interesting can you tell us who this is.

Some astrologers do say the birth time is missing the point and any chart will do. I have always had trouble with this more Judicial idea.

74 by CentralScrutinizer
Thank you Deb,

That was nice. Here's to hoping I get too old to type. ;)

I don't wish to start any problems with anyone. My reaction was to the nay-sayers who were REJECTING Isaac's rectification OUT OF HAND.

Anyone can be an armchair philosopher. You only need an armchair and internet connection. ;)

My point was/is/will-ever-be that, TO PROVE ONE METHOD DOESN'T WORK, just show how and why with DATA, not opinions.

I do understand your point of view. Nothing is being served by these circular arguments....certainly nothing is gained by the Forum. (well, besides the correct Michael Jackson birthtime) ;)

Have fun and don't worry, I will now cease and desist with arguing over Michael Jackson's birthtime.

James

Joy in Learning
Last edited by CentralScrutinizer on Mon Jun 29, 2009 5:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

75 by GR
CentralScrutinizer wrote: Velocity = Init-Vel + (Time * Acceleration)

...is also simple, but it's also wrong.
Actually, no, it's completely accurate, assuming no friction, all that friction does is either speed up or slow down the velocity depending of the frictional coeffiecients involved. Newton was quite aware of this, by the way, but it wasn't the point of his work.
CentralScrutinizer wrote: The Sun revolving around the Earth was a nice, simplistic explanation for the viewable heavens, but also wrong.
Ever heard of these http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_of_reference ?
Gabe

77 by CentralScrutinizer
Hello,

Re: "Actually, no, it's completely accurate, assuming no friction, all that friction...."

My point in posting it was that it is not correct... "completely accurate" would imply that it WAS correct. For velocities that approach the speed of light, this equation breaks down...friction or no.

If I am traveling at 1/2 the speed of light and an acceleration of 1/4 the speed of light per second, in 2 seconds, I am NOT going the speed of light.


James

78 by GR
CentralScrutinizer wrote: My reaction was to the nay-sayers who were REJECTING Isaac's rectification OUT OF HAND.
Actually I thought everybody has been doing that well in hand. You seem not to realize that the people criticizing the method all have backgrounds in some sort of qualitative science, whether it's engineering, statistics, data modeling, etc., and that number and symbol dumps are just not as impressive to them as to the usual astro-crowd.
CentralScrutinizer wrote: Anyone can be an armchair philosopher. You only need an armchair and internet connection. ;)
Oh, so those of us who have something negative to say about it are all obviously not real astrologers, thanks for clearing that up!
CentralScrutinizer wrote: My point was/is/will-ever-be that, TO PROVE ONE METHOD DOESN'T WORK, just show how and why with DATA, not opinions.
If it is clear that the methodolgy is suspect, that the 'data' itself is shaky, that the idea itself is in need of scrutinizing, there's no point in getting involved in a contests of squibbles and numbers and marks.
Gabe

79 by CentralScrutinizer
Hello jiger,

Yes, changing that time makes a TREMENDOUS difference in Topocentric Primary Directions. That is why they are so perfect for rectification.

In one example, changing the birthtime by 38 seconds MOVED the corresponding "event" over 2 MONTHS! (2 mo, 9 dy) in time. Pulling the relevant aspects until they line up the symbolically corresponding events rectifies the charts to SECONDS.

There is not so much info on the web concerning Topocentric Primary Directions... If you'd like more info, I would be glad to point you in the right direction.

Have fun!

James

80 by GR
CentralScrutinizer wrote:Hello,
"completely accurate" would imply that it WAS correct.
But it is correct. If we were talking about quantums of light, or the TARDIS maybe :) , then we'd need quantum mechanics or special relativity, as those physical elements operate differently. For just about everything else, Newtonian mechanics is the rule. I'm not seeing how you can argue with that.
CentralScrutinizer wrote: For velocities that approach the speed of light, this equation breaks down...friction or no.
Yes, but one system of mechanics doesn't contradict the other, they are quite reconciled.
Gabe

81 by Eddy
CentralScrutinizer wrote:There is not so much info on the web concerning Topocentric Primary Directions... If you'd like more info, I would be glad to point you in the right direction.
Astrodienst discribes some house systems over here, http://www.astro.com/swisseph/swisseph. ... c226863990
Astrodienst wrote:6.1.10. The Polich-Page (?topocentric?) system
This system was introduced in 1961 by Wendel Polich and A.P. Nelson Page. Its construction is rather abstract: The tangens of the polar height of the 11th house is the tangens of the geo. latitude divided by 3. (2/3 of it are taken for the 12th house cusp.) The philosophical reasons for this algorithm are obscure. Nor is this house system more ?topocentric? (i.e. birth-place-related) than any other house system. (c.f. the misunderstanding with the ?birth place system?.) The ?topocentric? house cusps are close to Placidus house cusps except for high geographical latitudes. It also works for latitudes beyond the polar circles, wherefore some consider it to be an improvement of the Placidus system. However, the striking philosophical idea behind Placidus, i.e. the division of diurnal and nocturnal arcs of points of the zodiac, is completely abandoned.
Hello Central Scrutinizer,

There is something I'd like to know about the Topocentric house system.

I've once read the article of Polich and Page and there too it is stated that Topocentric also works for high northern latitudes.
http://www.levante.org/domification/topocentre1.html

It is one of the two house systems I don't understand mathematically, I don't know how to imagine the technique and I haven't been able to reconstruct it with my just a handful of knowledge of spherical trigonometry, the Napier formulae of right angled spherical triangles.

Michael Wackford says that Topocentric 'works' up north because it then doesn't use the birth location anymore which would mean that this system doesn't make sense.
http://www.skyscript.co.uk/wackford.html

Could you please explain if Topocentric actually does work north of the polar circle and how this can be?

In the Astrodienst chart section I made Michael Jackson's birth charts for places in Canada, Northwest Territories: Resolute (74?41'North Latitude, 94?54'West) and Arctic Bay (at 73?02' North Lat, 85?11' West) respectively.

The Astrodienst charts have no Topocentric option and with Placidus at this latitude the system automatically switches to Porphyry. Regiomontanus gives results but here the houses turn 'around' and go 'clockwards'.

At the two Canada locations I gave, the Ascendant and MC are
are Resolute: Asc. 18?52'Aquarius, MC 10?46'Leo and
Arctic Bay: Asc. 13?16'Leo, MC 20?32' Aquarius
Note the 'jump' of the Ascendant, quite far for places so close (couple 100's of km?)

At least we have the cusps of the angles now which always are the same in every house system based upon Asc and MC.

Could you or Isaac please show what the chart would look like using your computer program on Topocentric houses? I assume that you would fully agree with me that similar exact prognostigation results should then also be attained for birth at such high latitudes on earth.

Thanks in advance :) .

82 by Olivia
Deb wrote:Hi James

I personally have no problem with the idea of rectification for famous personalities continuing after death. This has always been standard practice for astrologers, but let?s remember that traditionally they didn?t get instant connections to public discussion groups, so they didn?t appear to be preening over charts in the interim between the death and the burial.

Deb
Thank you, Deb. The man is dead. His children, and presumably other people who love him are still alive, and in a great deal of pain. And as you say, in this age of instant worldwide public communication - it's just too much - for me, anyway.

If some astrologer wants to sit in their room working it out to their own satisfaction I have no problem with it. But I hate to see anyone's death being turned into a circus, or in this case - potentially more of a circus than his life was.

I realise that may happen anyway, but visions of astrologers and tabloids being part of it does nothing to help our vocation, or to further the concept of basic human decency.

Michael Jackson't birth time

83 by Gemini18
I m afraid that there have been few posts on here which resonated at ANY level on this topic... Even though I have studied astrology for nearly 15 years, I have read people scrabbling around for different house systems/ precessed or not?/ relocated or not? all trying to make the chart fit.
I am actually starting to wonder am I in the same field as some on here. I am afraid it has left me quite bewildered.

Whilst I remain unconvinced still of his birthtime... and I am afraid I have a little more time for the Libra Asc than anyone else on here, the fact of the matter, is almost everyone here has forgot who this man is/was, which surely should go some way in assisting in rectification.

He was a global phenomena, with riches beyond most peoples wildest dreams.... even if he spent it all, future royalites will replensih it all! The point rightly made by Algaya is that we do not know the quality of his marriages, nor whether he actually fathered his children... and I suspect many many other things. It is one of the principal reason I beleve Neptune to be in the first or at very least angular.

I wrote a piece which was dismissed by most because of the Libra Asc, but even in reading Ben Dykes medieval astrological reivew of MJ's chart, it did nothing to actually demonstrate who this man was, nor the icon he became.

For my part, I have to believe that Fixed Stars played a huge part in MJ's life. Otherwise, what is there that is so phenomenal about his chart that made him the most famous person in the world??? Hence my version has his Asc/EP conj Spica, and his MC conjunct Pollux/Castor. This to me, is simple simple astrology.Indeed I may have over-simplifed matters, but for charts to not have any angle on a Fixed Star in this instance is inexplicable (to me anyway)

It probably does not suit anyone to consider this... but I cannot see anything that is so special about these other charts that would suggest the man that MJ was...

Also I do have to ask you all for your assistance... is it only me? But since when did the usage of Solar Returns to ANTHING assist to rectify a chart. I have been studying astrology for 15 years, and frankly I remain utterly unconvinced, so for so many to be harping on about SR's leaves me thinking you all know something I don't...(in spite of going to numerous conferences/lectures/books on the subject)... nothing will convince me of their accuracy or their efficacy. If anyone out there knows a book I should have read that will convince me I will be forever grateful...

In the meantime... I remain,

Yours sceptical

84 by Curtis SWN
I'm in the 11:43 pm camp. This puts the Sun and Pluto in the fourth house (using whole sign sidereal houses) in Leo indicating a strong parental influence (his father Joe Jackson) quite domineering actually. Saturn in Scorpio in the seventh indicating something very deep, intense, and pathological about relationships. Mars in the first with his vigorous performance style, and Moon as the third ruler in the tenth, which is a performer type of configuratoin in Vedic astrology (which is what I do)

There's more of course, but those are the most prominent in my mind at the moment. I wrote an article about his chart about five years ago.

Curtis Burns
Many articles published on www.starworldnews.com
!! Read first: forum policies
Recent topics
Post Reply

Return to “Nativities & General Astrology”