MikeCoop wrote:

The first is that the Sun issues its influence universally and without discrimination. It issues only solar influence and that is the same everywhere:

Possibly interesting physical angle to this is that the Sun itself spins, taking around 27 days to rotate, so in a calender month the solar electromagnetic environment that the earth is immersed in varies in a way that effects the whole globe.

mike c

Another interesting thing about the Sun's rotation is that since it is not a rigid body, the Sun has a differential rotation. At the poles the rotation period is 36 days. This differential rotation is related with the sunspot cycle. http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/ ... l&edu=high

Yesterday a 6.4 earthquake an earthquake struck Venezuela.

I doubted to put this post in the 'grand square thread' because I saw some relation with it. However there is also some relation with the eclipse and recently I reported another earthquake over here.
Saturday, September 12, 2009 at 20:06:25 UTC
10.757?N, 67.847?W
Close(st) place: Puerto Cabello 10?28'N, 68?01W.

Date/Time: 2009.09.12 20:06:25 UTC (GMT - Delta T), JD = 2455087.337789
Sidereal Time: 19:34:15, Delta T = 69.8 seconds
Geocentric positions

Phase of Moon: 0.777 (0.000=New; 0.250=First 1/4; 0.500=Full; 0.750=Last 1/4)

Planet Longitude Latitude Right Asc. Declination
Sun 20 Vir 11'20" 0?00'00" 11:23:56 3?53'12"
Moon 29 Gem 52'19" 2?30'02" 05:59:26 25?56'24"
Moon's Node 28 Cap 55'55" 0?00'00" 20:04:16 -20?22'23"
Apogee 25 Aqr 09'24"R 2?16'31" 21:46:38 -10?59'29"
Mercury 04 Lib 31'27"R - 4?10'58" 12:09:57 - 5?38'11"
Venus 20 Leo 36'31" 0?36'13" 09:32:49 15?11'38"
Mars 11 Cnc 13'11" 0?24'13" 06:48:57 23?22'03"
Jupiter 18 Aqr 38'24"R - 1?05'59" 21:25:42 -16?17'04"
Saturn 24 Vir 22'41" 1?58'06" 11:42:29 4?02'25"
Uranus 24 Psc 49'20"R - 0?47'57" 23:42:15 - 2?47'27"
Neptune 24 Aqr 23'45"R - 0?25'15" 21:47:22 -13?47'13"
Pluto 00 Cap 39'34" 5?28'29" 18:02:46 -17?57'47"

Angles at Puerto Cabello:
MC 18?01' Scorpio
Asc 9?42' Aquarius

Points of interest:
One day earlier Pluto turned direct and is almost standing still.
A few hours earlier Moon and Uranus were in exact square aspect and somewhat before Moon was square Saturn
Venus and Jupiter were square the MC

Angles at Puerto Cabello at the eclipse:
MC 0?33' Capricorn
Asc 0?43' Aries
This makes the position of Pluto significant in the eclipse chart, conjunct to MC and square Ascendant.

Now the angles of this earthquake may not have much relationship with the eclipse but just like there are 'aftershocks' there are also 'preshocks'
less than 40 minutes earlier in the same area (Caribbean Sea) there was another smaller 3.1 quake
Saturday, September 12, 2009 at 19:31:24 UTC
19.666?N, 64.408?W near Virgin Islands
close place: Road Town, Virgin Islands 18?27'N, 64?37'W thus close to Venezuela.
Angles at Road Town
MC 12?37' Scorpio
Asc 1?00' Aquarius

At Puerto Cabello for the same moment
MC 9?10' Scorpio
Asc. 0?42' Aquarius
A little difference and the Ascendant is close to the opposition point of the eclipse (see p.1 of the thread).

Perhaps what I am doing now is too much based upon chance of finding anything I want to but I think that in this case this is justified because of the proximity of the other earthquake which probably has introduced the next one.

Probably just a coincidence but I just read about an 'earthquake drill' in California:

"At 10:15 a.m. on October 15, 2009, millions of Californians will participate in the largest earthquake drill ever! The purpose of the ShakeOut is to practice how to protect ourselves during earthquakes, and to get prepared at work, school, and home."

http://www.shakeout.org/

Probably just a coincidence but this date is the same day that Mars will be conjunct the eclipse point.

Since I dedicated quite a few posts to the relationship between earthquakes and the 22 july eclipse I feel I should pay some attention to the recent earthquake in Samoa.

This is a very strong one with over 30! afterquakes in the region (see http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/rec ... es_all.php ), awful.
A huge disaster for this small group of islands that most people usually never hear of.

I don't manage to find any striking significant relationship in the charts of the earthquake and the eclipse with the methods I used in the other earthquakes. For the sake of the research, I believe one should also mention where a used technique fails.

Eddy wrote: I don't manage to find any striking significant relationship in the charts of the earthquake and the eclipse with the methods I used in the other earthquakes. For the sake of the research, I believe one should also mention where a used technique fails.

Why stopping to consider last eclipse? Moreover it was visible in Samoa?

Ptolemy says - I know here many will disagree but this is what Lilly, Cardano and all Renaissance authors teach - that the eclipse should be visible to have an effect.

For example together with Samoa tsunami there was an earthquake in Indonesia with at least 100 victims and Indonesia was on the path of the eclipse of 26th January.

This is just a very quick look, we could see which stars are at angles of the chart for example,

margherita

Earthquake hitting Sumatra

It would appear to me that Saturn in Virgo was on the ascendant of Southern Sumatra at the time of the total Solar Eclipse of July 22. The conjunction is very exact. Virgo is a sign associated with very large earthquakes. Sumatra is particularly vulnerable because of the fault in this area.

Astro*Cartography
Chart cast for the place of Quake, Southern Sumatra
I think there is a case for the earthquake. I would also consider and check with the first opposition of Saturn/Uranus that occured on Nov. 3. 2008 across 18VI58 - 18PI58. Whether Mercury's second station on Sep. 29 at 21VI37 has got anything to do with releasing the tension, I am not in a position to say, but on Nov 3. 2008 Mercury was 0SC and Neptune was stationary at 21AQ21 and ruled by Saturn. Mercury D at 21VI37 vs. Neptune D at 21AQ21.

Thanks for the encouraging words Margherita, and thanks for the map Andrew. I believe I was a bit hasty in my conclusion since I don't have much time these days (exam tomorrow).

(...)that the eclipse should be visible to have an effect.

On the eclipse path map it can be seen that the eclipse occurred just before sunset seen from Samoa (which was not on the eclipse path though).

Mercury was just at its station these days. The chart for the moment of earthquake in Padang, Indonesia shows the Saturn, Mercury - Uranus oppposition very close to the angles. The chart for the moment of the eclipse (or more exactly the degree of the new moon) is indeed very significant. But for Samoa (I looked for the place: Apia) I don't know what to look at... the semisquare of actual Mars to the Mars of the eclipse (which was then close to the ascendant)? Or is the applying conjunction (exact on 15 October) of Mars to the eclipse point already working?

Looking at the path of the eclipse, this is a topocentric view with different times for the eclipse at location. Perhaps the charts of these times would be logic too. I hope to have more time this weekend to have a closer examination.

Eddy wrote:Thanks for the encouraging words Margherita, and thanks for the map Andrew. I believe I was a bit hasty in my conclusion since I don't have much time these days (exam tomorrow).
to have more time this weekend to have a closer examination.

for example, i gave a quick look to the eclipse of the 26th January and if I'm not wrong- to me it's very difficult locating other cities than London and Paris - the eclipse fell around the cusp of 8th house, so it will give its effects at least after 8 months, and in fact we are at the end of September,

Good luck for your exam, this is past for me :p

margherita

The problem is that if one takes the visibility of the eclipse perhaps that moment should be used to make the chart.

In Indore, India the eclipse started just at sunrise at 0h53m30s UT. Ecliptically the distance Sun Moon was still 1?. The MC was 1?16' Taurus and Ascendant was 5?04' Leo.

If we take the moment of the New Moon (measured along the ecliptic) as I did in all calculations in the thread, for time 02:34:32 UT the MC was 26?45' Taurus and 27?31' Leo.

So there's quite a difference, which can be much larger in more northern latitudes like New York, Paris etc and especially with fast rising signs.

Although the topocentric view is interesting and probably of significance I have a problem with the reference along the ecliptic. MC, Ascendant and 0?Aries are points that in my opinion only can be determined geocentrically.

Ptolemy says - I know here many will disagree but this is what Lilly, Cardano and all Renaissance authors teach - that the eclipse should be visible to have an effect.

I'm not so sure about this. In my initial post in this thread, I mentioned the earthquake in Taiwan which occurred short after the earthquake in Turkey short after the 11 August 1999 solar eclipse. The eclipse however ended in India and wasn't visible in Taiwan, yet I believe this one was related to the earthquake in Turkey.

Hello Eddy

Eddy wrote:The problem is that if one takes the visibility of the eclipse perhaps that moment should be used to make the chart.

The traditional rule says "in the middle of the eclipse" so generally I take this for my charts.
And check visibility now it's very easy, for example NASA site gives such indication.

I'm not so sure about this. In my initial post in this thread, I mentioned the earthquake in Taiwan which occurred short after the earthquake in Turkey short after the 11 August 1999 solar eclipse. The eclipse however ended in India and wasn't visible in Taiwan, yet I believe this one was related to the earthquake in Turkey.

I know that many traditional astrologers don't consider visibility, anyway this is the method of Renaissance astrologers.
Generally I follow Cardano's comment to the second book of Tetrabiblos (it was translated in Italian by Faracovi, a professor of Pisa University and an astrologer) and I prefer this to Lilly, because it is more systematic, but Lilly talks many times about visibility.

This is the main requisite because the effects of eclipse according Ptolemy depend from changes in light, and if there is no change....

Anyway I understand that eclipses could be more in general an omen, a sign of the sky, so I can understand your position, which is common to many and I obviously I would not discard it. I tend to respect others' experience, let alone it is something impossible to believe.

margherita

Gjiada wrote:Hello Eddy

Eddy wrote:The problem is that if one takes the visibility of the eclipse perhaps that moment should be used to make the chart.

The traditional rule says "in the middle of the eclipse" so generally I take this for my charts.
And check visibility now it's very easy, for example NASA site gives such indication.

Hi Margherita,

Is the traditional rule then the same ecliptical degree of Sun and Moon or the time of greatest eclipse, which is the moment that the centers of Sun and Moon are at closest distance? (for more explanation, see my 27 september post, somewhere at the end, in the progression thread
http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4726 )
NASA mentions two moments. The second is the closest distance the first is the conjunction measured along the equator.
For example the 26 January 2009 eclipse/new Moon.
http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEplot/SEp ... Jan26A.GIF

From http://www.ephemeris.com/goto.php
NASA's first time, equatorial conjunction.
Date/Time: 2009.01.26 07:46:25 UTC

Planet Longitude Latitude Right Asc. Declination
Sun 06 Aqr 29'29" - 0?00'00" 20:35:31 -18?39'03"
Moon 06 Aqr 25'26" - 0?15'50" 20:35:31 -18?55'23"
Node 09 Aqr 16'23"R 0?00'00" 20:46:50 -17?56'06"
Apogee 03 Cap 25'20" - 3?06'20" 18:15:17 -26?29'59"

NASA's second time, moment of greatest eclipse

Date/Time: 2009.01.26 07:58:39 UTC
Planet Longitude Latitude Right Asc. Declination
Sun 06 Aqr 30'00" - 0?00'00" 20:35:33 -18?38'55"
Moon 06 Aqr 31'34" - 0?15'16" 20:35:55 -18?53'18"
Node 09 Aqr 16'23"R 0?00'00" 20:46:50 -17?56'06"
Apogee 03 Cap 26'51" - 3?06'13" 18:15:23 -26?29'50"

Ecliptical conjunction (not given by NASA)
Date/Time: 2009.01.26 07:55:13 UTC
Planet Longitude Latitude Right Asc. Declination
Sun 06 Aqr 29'51" - 0?00'00" 20:35:32 -18?38'57"
Moon 06 Aqr 29'51" - 0?15'25" 20:35:48 -18?53'53"
Node 09 Aqr 16'23"R 0?00'00" 20:46:50 -17?56'06"
Apogee 03 Cap 26'26" - 3?06'15" 18:15:21 -26?29'52"

In the first you see the right ascensions being the same.
In the second the latitudes and the declinations of Sun and Moon are at their closest, mutually
In the third the longitude are the same.

So if you want the last one, it's better to also try a bit with different times in your program.

The differences aren't big, just some minutes, and the closer to the Earth's equator the eclipse, the less are the differences. However this can give decisive differences for the angles. At higher Earth's latitudes the differences can be really big. See for example this remarcable 1986 eclipse near Iceland. Hey, that's today exactly 23 years ago.

http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEplot/SEp ... Oct03H.GIF
The two NASA times are almost one hour apart!

Here the ecliptical data,
Date/Time: 1986.10.03 18:54:47 UTC
Planet Longitude Latitude Right Asc. Declination
Sun 10 Lib 15'57" 0?00'00" 12:37:44 - 4?03'56"
Moon 10 Lib 15'57" 0?58'20" 12:39:16 - 3?10'17"
Node 20 Ari 51'50"R 0?00'00" 01:17:06 8?08'45"
Apogee 04 Gem 29'28"R 3?38'36" 04:07:09 24?37'21"

Eddy wrote: Is the traditional rule then the same ecliptical degree of Sun and Moon or the time of greatest eclipse, which is the moment that the centers of Sun and Moon are at closest distance?

Hello Eddy, but you were not studying for your exam? And on the contrary you spend time with astrology...


I don't take the conjunction of Lights because the traditional rule is "the middle of the eclipse."

Generally I take the point of maxim obscuration (from Nasa site).
In fact eclipses does not last the same time everywhere, but this you know more than me, I generally struggle with astronomy

margherita