Hi, people

Please, moderation on the comments or I will freeze the thread. The objective o the exercise was clear that:

1- the exercise had only three events, which is not considered enough for most astrologers.
2- it was not a controlled test over the ability of astrologers
3- it is not a controlled experiment with power to show if techniques are good or not.
4 - the purpose of the exercise was to everyone to try it out their favourite technique, to learn other techniques of other astrologers and to have fun.
5- to stop the flaming remarks that were happening about rectification, giving the opportunity to forum members to show instead of telling.

This late line of the thread is showing a disregard or lack of respect for everyone who invested a lot of effort on the spirit of fun and astrological learning. Please, don?t engage on accusations, early conclusions about the efficiency of techniques or of the merit of astrologers, or anything that is contrary to the spirit in which this thread was created.

If there is a "conclusion" for this exercise, I would say that it is that rectification is a hard and complex process, and the wider the window of time, the harder it is, and more the possibility of you finding a "false positive".

All other conclusions I would say that should take its own time. The value of a technique is its continuous use on prediction.

Best regards

Hello Yuzuru,

This has gotten silly. Part of that was too much energy on my part. I am sorry. That is my fault.

The "initial cause" was somewhat silly, an easily Googleable rectification challenge, has fulfilled its destiny and we end up here.

It seems like a wonderful idea, Yuzuru, begging to be more scientifically applied. Certainly, many astrologers, who likely have "better" things to do, spent some time on this challenge; which indicates that it would work and that it is desired. Also, some people love a challenge or a mystery to solve, in addition to loving astrology.

I do have a strong feeling that with enough challenges, a PARTICULAR approach would emerge as the "most proficient."

We are astrologers, (mostly) who communicate insights based on the exactness of time. It would certainly behoove us all to start with the best information possible. Any "work" along that line can only be a good thing.

Peace

Central Scrutinizer

I liked this rectification exercise and I hope there will be more to come. It?s a pity this thread went somewhat astray. Mistrust and jealousy have rarely been good advisors???.

It is disappointing to note that none of the techniques applied (including mine of course) have led to a (one!) correct result. This encourages me in my approach not to rectify and use the safe data I have ? in this case, 3am +/- three hours or 01h30 +/- one hour. No Ascendant, no precise Moon position etc. The only exception I make is fine-tuning a well documented birth time when a series of Primary Directions to the angles and the corresponding events are constantly off (on the same side!) by a few weeks or months.

Retrospectively, with the precise birth time, I tried to find Primary Directions aspects for the 3 events in the native?s life. Since they were quite drastic experiences, they should definitely show if the method has any predictive value. I used Rumen Kolev?s software ?PLACIDUS? and had a look at (only DIRECT) Directions:

? Directions to the angles, in mundo and in zodiaco
? Placidian Mundo Parallels (//) and Rapt parallels (#)
? Placidian Mundo Interplanetary conjunctions and oppositions, Mundo and Rapt parallels, Rapt conjunctions
? Aspects to house cusps (medieval aspects, Placidus)

With the keys

? Ptolemy
? Naibod
? Brahe/Kepler
? Placidus
? Sun Longitude (24h)
? K?ndig

The search was like looking for a needle in a haystack, there are heaps of aspects , but the yield was meagre . And the problem is, one cannot make a good distinction of slow and faster moving elements, like for example with Progressions and transits, to find a basic theme in the slow elements, and narrow the time down with the faster elements.
Here is what I found. I took an orb of about +/- 2 months.

Grandfather?s death 19 May 1976
? Moon/Saturn (d) => Rapt parallel (#) DC. Brahe/Kepler key April 20, Placidus key May 27.
? NN (d) => parallel (//) Mars (Horizon). Brahe/Kepler April 29, Placidus June 5.
? Mars (d) => // Neptun (Meridian). Ptolemy April 5, Naibod May 26.

Father?s death 18 January 1979
? Saturn (d) => // Saturn (Meridian). Ptolemy January 2, Naibod March 9.
? Moon (d) => // Pluto (Meridian). Ptolemy March 17.
? Moon (d) in mundo => IC (orb 6 months). Brahe/Kepler 21April 1979, Placidus 21 June 1979, Sun Longitude 13 November 1978.
? (Moon (d) in zodiaco => IC is too far off event 1 and 2)

Car Accident 16 August 1986
? Uranus/Mercury (d) => Rapt conjunction Mercury. Naibod August 7.

If all these hits were with one and the same key, I could accept the technique as useful. But with so many different keys and such meagre results out of an abundance of hits, it is ? in my opinion - not suited for prognosis.

I think the whole medieval concept of Primary Directions has to be revised and reformed. I?m thinking along the line of Ed Falis and Martin Gansten?s ideas in another thread to look at Secondary Motion, Parallax and maybe even refraction, and finally to ?invent? or agree upon one universally valid key!
(I am just reading Martin Gansten?s book on Primary Directions. A very good book!)

This failure of traditional Primary Directions contrasts with other techniques that reflect the 3 events better. Here is a choice of aspects with tight orbs.

Grandfather?s death 19 May 1976, 22h30 BZT2 +3h, in Rio de Janeiro
=> Aspects of the month(s)
? Moon (2nd progressed) -45?- Saturn (2nd progressed) 12 May 1976
? Moon (2nd progressed) -45?- Saturn (radix) 10 June 1976
? Moon (2nd progressed) -60?- Sun (radix) orb 00?00?
=> Aspects of the day(s)
? AC (2nd progressed, mean quotidian) -180?- Moon (radix) 20 May 1976, 06h30
? Mars (transit) -0?- Mars (2nd progressed), 20 May 1976, 02h22 (orb 00?05?)
? Sun (transit) -0?- true NN (Solar Arc Directed), orb 00?20? applying
? Sun (transit) -180?- Neptune (Solar Arc Directed), orb 00?16? separating
=> Aspects of the hour / minutes
? AC (transit) -0?- Moon (2nd progressed) 19 May 1976, 22h24
? AC (transit) -0?- Moon (transit), MC (transit) -0?- Neptune/NN (radix) 19 May 23h10


Father?s death 18 January 1979, 05h BZT2 +3h, in Rio de Janeiro
=> Aspects of the month(s)
? Mars (2nd progressed) -60?- Moon (radix), orb 00?03? separating
? Venus (2nd progressed) -90?- Neptune (2nd progressed), orb 00?02? separating
? Neptune (transit) -135?- Venus (radix), orb 00?03? applying)
? Moon (2nd progressed) -90?- ASC (radix), orb 00?17? applying
? True NN (transit) -0?- Uranus (radix), orb 00?04? separating
? Uranus (transit) -0?- true SN (radix), orb 00?17? separating
? Saturn (transit) -180?- Moon (2nd progressed), orb ~ 1?
? MC (Solar Arc) -180?- Moon (radix) orb ~ 1? separating
=> Aspects of the hour / minutes
? Moon (transit) -180?- MC (radix), orb 01?05? applying
? MC (transit) -0?- Moon (Solar Arc), orb 00?38? applying


Car Accident 16 August 1986, 09h32 BZT2 +3h, near Rio de Janeiro
=> Aspects of the month(s)
? Sun (2nd progressed) -90?- ASC (radix), orb 00?29? separating
? Moon (2nd progressed) -90?- Pluto (radix), 28 August 1986, orb 00?20? applying
? ASC (Solar Arc) -90?- Moon (radix), orb 00?10? separating
? Uranus (transit) -90?- Uranus (radix), orb 00?04? separating
? Uranus (transit) -90?- Pluto (2nd progressed), orb 00?16? applying
=> Aspects of the day(s)
? Mars (transit) -90?- MC (2nd progressed, mean quotidian), orb 00?01? applying
=> Aspects of the hour / minutes
? ASC (transit) -90?- Mars (radix), orb ca. 0.5?
? MC (transit) -90?- Saturn (Solar Arc), orb ca. 0?

What strikes me is the interplay of various time keys and the similarity of aspects. Take event 2, death of the father. Solar Arc MC is opposite Moon; Transiting Moon is at the IC; and transiting MC is conjunct the Solar Arc Moon! - BTW, I used the parallax corrected Moon.
Not surprisingly, the Moon played a prominent role in the first two events concerning close family members.

Now we have the wisdom of hindsight, but that is true for all methods! I doubt that the events could have been predicted with any method and if, it would have taken an enormous effort. Or new techniques?

I wonder what you think

Ren?

P.S. I also checked the tropical Solar returns, the ingresses and Solar eclipses. Solar Returns matched the events quite well ? in hindsight of course!

3D wrote:(I am just reading Martin Gansten?s book on Primary Directions. A very good book!)

Thanks, Ren?.

Now, I haven't contributed to this thread earlier and am no dab hand at rectification, but I would just like to comment on this:

I think the whole medieval concept of Primary Directions has to be revised and reformed. I?m thinking along the line of Ed Falis and Martin Gansten?s ideas in another thread to look at Secondary Motion, Parallax and maybe even refraction, and finally to ?invent? or agree upon one universally valid key!

The (ancient and) medieval concept of primary directions may or may not need to be revised, but first I think it needs to be understood. The special problems related (mainly) to the Moon are important, I believe, but not as important as approaching the technique as a whole in the right way.

If I may focus on the tragic accident which left the native paraplegic, what in the radix indicates it? To my mind paraplegia is clearly a Saturn affliction, and there is a very nasty angular Saturn in the chart. (I won't go into detail, as zodiac issues might distract us from the main points. ) So, assuming that the birth time was correctly noted, it is almost certainly relevant that this Saturn squared the Asc around the age of 16. Yes, I know that this was four years before the accident! But there is still a Saturn influence on the Asc until it reaches its next aspect (which is another square, this time from the Moon, and not helpful).

But a car accident in itself is more likely to be a Mars event, so we should expect Mars to be involved as well. And in fact there is a Mars square to the Moon (ruler of the sect and, some would say, hyleg -- in any case, an important significator) which perfects, depending on what special criteria we apply to the Moon, just around the time of the accident. The exact date would, as always, depend on other factors (transits, profections, etc). But I think we can do without Uranus and a full porter's set of keys!

These were just a few random comments, thrown together in the middle of the night (curse all rowdy neighbours!) after a brief look at the chart, so I apologize in advance for any oversights.

Hi, 3D

I agree with Martin?s answer.

I am locking this thread because the exercise has already fulfilled his utility, and now I am having to erase posts by forum?s members who didn?t try out the mystery chart, but after having the answer came here to say that their technique is better than everyone else!

This kind of behaviour really bugs me, as it is disrespectful to everybody who really did make an effort, to come here AFTER the mystery chart is over to gloat how their technique is excellent! If it really was that good, than do the effort, and play by the rules, as everybody else!!

so I am locking the tread to avoid further attempts of people who won?t do the effort and take the risk, but want to show off.