Martin Gansten wrote:Rob: I may be completely off here, but: as Placidean mundane aspects (and mundane/rapt parallels) are based wholly on proportional semi-arcs, and no actual aspect point is being directed, I don't see how such directions could be performed using circles of position ('under the pole').

And I thought they were a supposedly easier-to-calculate approximation to the semiarc method.

- Ed

Ed F wrote:And I thought they were a supposedly easier-to-calculate approximation to the semiarc method.

If you had the tables handy, and before the age of calculators, I suppose they were!

Martin Gansten wrote:

Ed F wrote:And I thought they were a supposedly easier-to-calculate approximation to the semiarc method.

If you had the tables handy, and before the age of calculators, I suppose they were!

Likewise. I was around back then - Topo PDs by hand. Parallax correction too (try that with the trutine sometime if you're feeling really masochistic).

I noticed that Astro program will run under DOSBOX on a XP machine.

- Ed

Ed F,

Don't take this the wrong way, I am happily married, but I LOVE YOU!

I have been having to drag an old HP Pavillion laptop out (which overheats) in order to use Astro...and now, you have given me the key to run it on all my computers. I already see that it works on my home system.

I am sending much luck your way!

Thanks!

TransmaniaconMC

Excellent! I had to try it, since I use the Concept program from http://www.levante.org/ that does my preferred method of primary directions, and it stopped working with XP, but worked with DOSBOX.

I'm happily married too, but send best wishes for your explorations.

As far as Topo PD's go, it's been a long time (they were the first ones I learned). If I remember rightly, they're zodiacal under the topo pole?

- Ed

Hi,

I have a question about terms(related to PDs) and created a topic:
http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... 3127#43127

rob

Hello Martin,

Thanks for your response.

Martin: "Speaking personally, my objection is not (mainly) to the Topocentric system of houses and directions as such, but to the many new planets and aspects used. I emphatically agree on the need for accurate symbolism, but to me that means using the astrological symbols agreed upon by astrologers for the past two millennia. If Topocentric directions could be seen consistently to produce Mars directions (to classical significators, with classical aspects) for Mars events, and Venus directions for Venus events, to the day or even month, I would gladly forget my mathematical objections to the system."

Many new planets and aspects? ???

Newer than Pluto?

Re: "If Topocentric directions could be seen consistently to produce Mars directions for Mars events..."

???

Like JFK's Assassination, Sun square Saturn, correct to the day? (If Sun, squares, or Saturn are too new, then there's not much left to work with...)

Or the (obvious symbolism of the) Cuban Missile Crisis, Mars trine MC, correct to the day?

Or JFK's Son's Death, (could not really be more symbolically appropriate than) 5th opposite Pluto, 1.3 days?

Or JFK's Back Operation, Mars trine Asc, 5.3 days?

I don't see what is weird or voodoo-like about these. These are normal examples of Topocentric Primary Directions and their specificity and very small time-orb.

I admit to and understand my bias towards this technique. I have seen it work over and over and over again. I don't understand an arbitrary bias against the technique.

Can it not be judged by its merits, exclusive of preconceived notions?


TransmaniaconMC

TransmaniaconMC wrote:Many new planets and aspects? ???

Newer than Pluto?

No, basically anything added from the 17th century onwards -- not because of some arbitrary bias in favour of the old, but because the twelve signs, five aspects and seven planets together form a complete symbol system. Being complete, it cannot be added to without losing its internal coherence, which is precisely what started happening in the 17th century.

Re: "If Topocentric directions could be seen consistently to produce Mars directions for Mars events..."

???

Sorry if I was unclear. I meant: as opposed to Pluto directions, etc.

Like JFK's Assassination, Sun square Saturn, correct to the day? (If Sun, squares, or Saturn are too new, then there's not much left to work with...)

If the Sun was hyleg in his chart, that would seem fine, although I should like to see Mars involved as well, given the nature of his death. But the direction would be equally valid even if it were several months off, as long as it were triggered by a relevant transit or similar.

Or the (obvious symbolism of the) Cuban Missile Crisis, Mars trine MC, correct to the day?

In the then President's natal chart? I don't think the trine symbolism is very obvious.

I don't see what is weird or voodoo-like about these.

Voodoo?

Can it not be judged by its merits, exclusive of preconceived notions?

No more than any other astrological technique can. We need those 'preconceived notions' of astrological symbolism as something against which to test techniques. Some of your examples sound fine to me, while others sound off.

Hello Martin,

Thank you for your honesty and your time.

If I wasn't passionate (and convinced) about the technique, I certainly wouldn't come on here and bang my head against the wall.

Re: "Being complete, it cannot be added to without losing its internal coherence,..."

This is the "News" section, not the "Traditional" section. Would this NOT be the section for techniques that came along later than the 16th Century? If not, it's not news.

Re: "If the Sun was hyleg in his chart..."

According to Bonatti, it is. As for Mars, I don't know exactly what you mean by "...I should like to see Mars involved as well..." Are you saying that death by violence should only be shown by Mars? Examing not very many charts of victims of violence would quickly lead away from that conclusion.

Re: "I don't think the trine symbolism is very obvious."

I can't speak for other systems, but in Topocentric Primary Directions, it is often the case that the CONTACT is more important than the specific aspect involved. If you have Mars in Taurus square to Saturn in Leo (natally), if later we see (TPD) Saturn TRINE Mars, I certainly would NOT expect good things to come of it, despite the trine aspect.

Re: "Some of your examples sound fine to me, while others sound off."

Okay, let's focus on the ones you like, then. The fact that the symbolism is right AND the time orb is so close (sometimes to the DAY--you must admit 0? 0.0' is tight) certainly points away from coincidence.

One thing that we certainly can agree on is the necessity of correct symbolism. On a certain other website (no names), a Solar Arc Venus squaring Mercury might be listed as conclusive/relevant to Death, JUST BECAUSE VENUS RULES THE 8TH. Using that logic, anything CAN mean anything. ie. we get nowhere fast

The problem is...we are talking about different systems. The same aspects by transit that indicate _____ are not necessarily (and are NOT specifically) the same aspects in Topocentric Primary Directions for _____. For example, Death of the Mother in Topocentric Primary Directions is often shown by Moon or Venus contacting the IC. Transiting Venus conjuncting the IC wouldn't (generally) even elicit a reaction from the Astrologer.

Thanks again for taking the time, Martin.


TransmaniaconMC

This is the "News" section, not the "Traditional" section.

Whilst this is true, I am wondering how Tzu Jan?s chart rectification managed to make the news. If I knew where to put it instead, I would move this thread. It?s not really a piece of news or a notice is it?

At least it has some links and some comments about Martin?s book.

Martin Gansten wrote:

TransmaniaconMC wrote:The point can still be made that if the people using them were having very accurate results, then the technique would have had a much lower potential of dying off.

The point can be made, but it won't stand up to historical scrutiny. The parts of astrology that survived the great simplification process of the late 19th and early 20th centuries were not the most accurate ones, but the least demanding ones (like the emphasis on Sun signs). A few technical-minded astrologers on the Continent did pick up some of the more advanced bits (like primary directions), but after WW II there were very few of them left.

Speaking personally, my objection is not (mainly) to the Topocentric system of houses and directions as such, but to the many new planets and aspects used. I emphatically agree on the need for accurate symbolism, but to me that means using the astrological symbols agreed upon by astrologers for the past two millennia. If Topocentric directions could be seen consistently to produce Mars directions (to classical significators, with classical aspects) for Mars events, and Venus directions for Venus events, to the day or even month, I would gladly forget my mathematical objections to the system.

Here are some examples for Topocentric primary directions using only the classical planets,angles and only the classical aspects.
Orbs are in minutes of arc, maximum orbs are: 11' (equal to 65 days) for conjunction and opposition and 6' (equal to 35 days) for all the other aspects.
c= converse
Barack Obama rectified time to 19.21.27 AHST
1. Marriage 18 Oct 1992
Ven 0 Moon 1' (c)
Venus 180 Jup 4'
2. Daughter born 4 July 1998
Ven 180 MC 7' (c)
3. Nomination 3 June 2008
Jup 60 Asc 0' (c)
4. Elected President 4 Nov 2008
Moon 60 Asc 5' (c)
Mer 60 MC 5'
Ven 180 Asc 7'
Margaret Thatcher rectified time to 8.44.24 UT
1. Failure 18 Oct 1951
Mer 0 Sat 3'
2. Birth of twins 15 Aug 1953
Ven 0 Asc 6' (c)
Asc 0 Mer 0' (c)
MC 120 Ven 5' (c)
3. Failure 17 Oct 1964
Sat 60 Mars 3'
Mars 0 Asc 8'
4. Promotion 31 March 1966
Jup 180 MC 6'
5. Death of father 10 Feb 1970
Sun 60 Sat 2' (c)
Theodore Roosevelt rectified time to 0.21.05 UT 28 Oct
1. Marriage 27 Oct 1880
Ven 120 Moon 5' (c)
MC 60 Mars 1'
2. Marriage 2 Dec 1886
Moon 0 Asc 1' (c)
Jup 0 Moon 5'
3. Son born 10 Oct 1889
Ven 0 Sun 3' (c)
Mars 180 Asc 9' (c)
Jup 60 Moon 5' (c)
4. Promotion 11 July 1898
Jup 180 Sun 3' (c)
MC 180 Moon 7' (c)
5. Marriage of daughter 17 Feb 1906
Moon 180 MC 5'
Elizabeth Taylor rectified time 01.54.24 UT
1. Son born 6 Jan 1953
Ven 60 Sun 4'
Mer 180 MC 5'
2. Daughter born 6 Aug 1957
Mars 180 MC 6'
MC 180 Mer 5' (c)
3. Marriage 6 March 1964
Ven 120 Moon 5'

Hello Deb,

You are the boss. You can decide what you mean by "News, Notices, Books, Links."

If there was really an appropriate section for this thread, it would be the Astrology Software section.

Since there's not one of those (that I know of), and Martin is in the conversation and his book is directly and indirectly referenced, Books seems closest to where it should go.

If you stick "Software" between Books and Links, it'd be street legal.

I am enjoying this opportunity to learn. Thank you for the Forum.

Have fun!

TransmaniaconMC