Can you give an example of that?

Also where did you find the midnight ephemeris and why use that one instead of a regular ephemeris?

And how did you get the Greenwich GST at moment of birth?

I have the updated American edition of Parkers' (2001) and what I'm learning from you is easier and simpler than what I'm reading in the edition I have.

Also, as I look in the Table of Houses in the Parkers' book, it tells me to use the nearest information to what I have, that you have given me. And it still seems off.

Juan wrote:
minus longitude 5h24m52s

Okay. This is where I'm coming up with 5h26m52s.

According to the longitude time correction chart, 43 minutes = 2m52s.

After having slept on it, this is the only thing that is stumping me.

Juan wrote: With that ST you look into a Table of Houses, which should give the Asc. in 17,29 Virgo and the MC in 15,55 Gem.

Juan

The Table of Houses that I have in the back of the book, even based on my calculations does not give anything but a rounded version of the degrees, i.e. my calculation of 4:56:51 ST is closer to 4:54:53 which is 15 degrees MC in Gemini.

Juan wrote:I will assume that the GMT of your birth is indeed 15:23 as you say, which means that you were born at 10:23 a.m. EST.

You must convert 15:23 to sidereal time or "accelerate", multiplying by 1.002738 or adding 10s for each hour, the result is 15:25:32. To this you must add the ST at 0h in Greenwich, which is 6:56:13. The result is 22:21:45. This is the sidereal time at Greenwich when you were born. Now you must subtract the longitude of your birth place (81?13'/15 = 5:24:52). The result is 16:56:53 or 16h56m53s. This is the sidereal time at the moment and place you were born, from which you calculate the houses (ASC = 4,53 Pisces, MC = 15,28 Sagittarius).

Juan

Okay, looked at birth certificate and I was originally correct. I was born at 10:23 AM EST.

Now for the awesome part . . . I finally understood everything that you told me and have come to the SAME conclusions.

The only thing is that the Table of Houses does not give me the exact information that you gave me in regarding to the MC and ASC. How did you calculate those?

Sorry for posting like a maniac. I really appreciate your help.

Hello TerpBKS

I don't have the book you're using but I have a different one by the same authors, and other books in a similar format where they give a good all-round view of the subject and basic tables to enable calculations to be made.

These types of introductory books do tend to give rounded figures in the back, using simplified Tables of Houses and simplified Ephemerides. It's so that no specialist books need to be bought in order to get going, and so it's very handy but also as you've already encountered they have their limitations.

Having said that, even if you had a separate dedicated Tables of Houses booklet it still wouldn't give the accuracy that can be achieved using computer calculations made directly using the relevant mathematics. For example, using Raphael's Tables of Houses as we used to do in the olden days (!) my MC was in one sign, but using a computer it turned out that the MC had just crept into the next sign.

Some computer software will generate a Tables of Houses according to parameters that you input, so they can be much more accurate than the old pre-printed booklets which, for reasons of size/space, can't be published for every single latitude and every single minute of the clock.

I think it's really good and admirable that you want to learn how to calculate charts, not just type the data into online websites. Once you've learned to calculate them yourself it's more accurate to use a computer-calculated chart for the reasons above, but it's really a very good idea to first do what you're doing. You learn much more the way you're doing it, as well as gain a more thorough understanding of the 'left-brain' work involved in astrology that most of the public and media just don't have. So many of them tend to think that everything astrological comes easily and therefore cheaply, as if the chart and any directions, synastry, etc are all plucked out of thin air or some kind of psychic mist.

I can remember doing it and making tons of mistakes in the maths (maths not being my strong point). A calculator that has a button on it to convert to/from decimals and hours-minutes-seconds/degrees-minutes-seconds was very handy (even though computers have these in-built calculator programs, I personally still prefer using a hand-held calculator to an on-screen one), but again it's good to learn to do it yourself at first otherwise you'd never understand what the computer's doing and the computer could churn out anything and you wouldn't be able to check if it's wrong or right.

Regards

H.

handn wrote:I think it's really good and admirable that you want to learn how to calculate charts, not just type the data into online websites. Once you've learned to calculate them yourself it's more accurate to use a computer-calculated chart for the reasons above, but it's really a very good idea to first do what you're doing. You learn much more the way you're doing it, as well as gain a more thorough understanding of the 'left-brain' work involved in astrology that most of the public and media just don't have. So many of them tend to think that everything astrological comes easily and therefore cheaply, as if the chart and any directions, synastry, etc are all plucked out of thin air or some kind of psychic mist.

I can remember doing it and making tons of mistakes in the maths (maths not being my strong point). A calculator that has a button on it to convert to/from decimals and hours-minutes-seconds/degrees-minutes-seconds was very handy (even though computers have these in-built calculator programs, I personally still prefer using a hand-held calculator to an on-screen one), but again it's good to learn to do it yourself at first otherwise you'd never understand what the computer's doing and the computer could churn out anything and you wouldn't be able to check if it's wrong or right.

Regards

H.

Thanks, H.

Yeah, I've learned one thing already and that is that it's more fun and more personalized to do it on your own. However, I understand the making the mistakes.

It truly is a lot of work but I've come to understand that it's more personal to cast a chart than it is to generate one from the web, especially because the web is so generalized. Also, I do have some intuitive abilities that could assist in interpreting the charts (when I get to that point) as well.

So, enlighten me . . .

How do I calculate charts?

I won't go any further with my chart until I can understand the how-to, so that I can make it accurate and not a "guesstimate".