Hello Juan,

Re: "I posted a list of 18 biographical events 3 days ago, I was hoping you would use Polaris to find a suitable time, and that we can discuss the results. Maybe you didn't see it?"

I did see it and took a look at it. I would like more events in order to have more confidence. I am leaning strongly towards an Ascendant of 24? 35' Virgo...but, as I said, would like some more events if you have them. (both to further test Polaris "resolve" and also to run as out-of-sample tests for the chart that I am leaning towards)

Take care

James

Hello Paul,

Re: "Keeping this in mind, we might need to recognise that James is just a working astrologer offering his time freely here, but his own interest may also be more about comparison, or at least understanding where the goalposts are first."

Thanks. As I have time, I will try to help this discussion along.

I certainly think that the topic is CRITICAL. (ie. the accuracy of birth times and the relevance of Topocentric Houses)

Have fun

James

Atlantean wrote:I did see it and took a look at it. I would like more events in order to have more confidence. I am leaning strongly towards an Ascendant of 24? 35' Virgo...but, as I said, would like some more events if you have them. (both to further test Polaris "resolve" and also to run as out-of-sample tests for the chart that I am leaning towards)
Take care. James

Thanks, James. I have many more events but they don't have specific dates, only the month for example. Anyway, they are probably not needed because the late Virgo Asc. is an excellent point to start with (I mean you are on the right track). Can you explain why do you think this might be the correct Asc.?

A second question: do you so far have a second choice? Why?

Juan

Hello Juan,

Re: "Thanks, James. I have many more events but they don't have specific dates, only the month for example."

You are welcome! It's okay... I can use dated events "to the month". In Polaris, there is a field where (for each event) you can enter how much leeway there might be. ie. for something that (for sure) happened in June, I would enter June 15 and with a 15 day leeway.

I would like a few more events...I think it will make Polaris more resolved that this is the right time (assuming). Also, if it is right, these extra events would be great, since they make a good test.

Re: "Can you explain why do you think this might be the correct Asc.?

The combination of Primary Directions as well as looking at some diurnal charts at events. The chart shows a certain "consistency" that I have (often) witnessed before. With more events, I'd have more confidence (that it's right or that it's wrong).

Re: "(I mean you are on the right track...)"

That's consoling.

Re: "A second question: do you so far have a second choice? Why?"

The Polaris list has many choices on it. This is the time that I liked best from looking with several other methods for confirmation. I didn't have all that much time to dedicate to it, but since this timing seems to work quite well in several systems, I am putting forth this time (pending a slightly more involved look, if I have a few more events).

Take care

James

James

Does Polaris allow you to change the house system or other parts of the 'equation'? Would be curious what time it gives if you use Placidus.

Is there a list of potential times then? Does it weight them in terms of likelihood, or did you arrive at this time by just examining all the ones it listed against other methods?

Hello Paul,

Re: "Does Polaris allow you to change the house system or other parts of the 'equation'?"

No, Polaris works only with Topocentric Houses. It falls under the "if it ain't broken, don't fix it" clause.

Re: "Would be curious what time it gives if you use Placidus."

Insert incorrect time here ____:____:____.

Re: "Is there a list of potential times then?"

Yes, it lists quite a list from the highest T (special cumulative weighted value) to much lower T-scores. Usually, a combination of higher T-score that is also showing many angular contacts ends up being the right one... only through testing with the other methods could we be reasonably sure.

Re: "Does it weight them in terms of likelihood..."

Yes, however, angular contact is extremely important. The list is (originally) sorted in terms of T-score. It can also be sorted in other ways...by angular aspects, etc., as well as by time. Very often the correct time ends up being one of the higher T-scores that also has a high A-score.

Re: "...or did you arrive at this time by just examining all the ones it listed against other methods?"

Polaris liked that time, but I used several other systems to see which one I thought was right.

What has been the case is that the more events that are added, the higher up the list the correct birth time rises. I've had several really difficult ones that the person later sent one or two more events and it was suddenly easy to discern the correct one.

Each one (rectification) is unique... one can't tell going in just how many events, relative to a particular search range, will be needed. Some with a short search range still needed quite a few events and some (like Ken Haining's) have a large search range and very few events and it's still easily resolvable.

Take care

James

http://www.levante.org/domification/topocentre1.html
SPICA, 1964, vol. 3, n? 3, p. 3-10
THE TOPOCENTRIC SYSTEM OF HOUSES
by Wendel Polich & A. P. Nelson Page

I redid example 3 to make it look tidy and compact and without logs:


Pole and OA or OD of a Planet or Star
_____________________________________
RAMC 57?30' Lat. 51n32'

Moon:
RA 115?52'
Decl +18?37'
______
RA Moon - RAMC = MD
115?52' - 57?30'
MD = 58?22'
______
tan (Lat.) * tan (Decl) = sin (AD)
tan 51?32' * tan 18?37' = sin (AD)
AD = 25?05'
______
AD + 90?00' = Diurnal SA
SA = 115?05'
______
(MD) * tan (Lat.) / (SA) = tan (Pole)
58?22' * tan 51?32' / 115?05' = tan (Pole)
Pole = 32?33
______
tan (Pole) * tan (Decl) = sin AD
tan 32?33 * tan 18?37' = sin AD
AD = 12?25
______
RA Moon - AD = OA Moon
115?52' ? 12?25'
OA Moon = 103?27'

Did not see many more events that feel significant, but here are 3 that might help:

1890, sept: engagement (married June 1892)
1904, sept: moves permanently with family to a small property in the woods
1909, 1st week: a trip to the mountains of Karelia with brother-in-law

The "premiers" or 1st public performances of his 8 major works:

1-) 26 April 1899
2-) 8 March 1902/revised version 10 nov 1903
3-) 8 Feb 1904/revised version 19 Oct 1905 (his most popular work to this date)
4-) 25 Sept 1907
5-) 3 April 1911
6-) 8 Dec 1915/revised version 24 Nov 1919
7-) 19 Feb 1923
8-) 24 March 1924 ("his greatest achievement)"

Juan

Point (1)

http://skyscript.co.uk/pdf/TopocentricHouses.pdf
The first such to confront the present writer concerned the house locations of the planets. A planetary body can sit to just one side of a Topo cusp in the horoscope, yet cross over to the other when reckoned upon Topo?s frame of reference. This did not seem right at all as the reason was NOT due to that planet ?having latitude.?
...(1)

Footnotes:
(1) Such an analysis was conducted by the late Dr. Margaret Millard, shortly after this article was first published. As a result, Margaret - a long-time adherent to Topocentric houses and a promoter of the method - promptly dropped it in favour of the semi-arc system.

This is because the house cusps are calcuated as shown in example 1 + example 2 in this article:
http://www.levante.org/domification/topocentre1.html

And the house lines for doing PDs are calculated as shown in example 3.

They are not the same, and this is why point (1) exists.

In simple: If I calculate while the Sun is exactly(<1 arcsecond) on the topocentric house cusp, the pole of the Sun will not be the same as the pole used to make the cusp.

In an example where the Sun is near 0 Cap, the poles were not the same until the house cusp. was over 32 arcminutes different from the Sun.

So if I calculated for houses the same way as for PDs... I could get results that differed by up to a handful of months.

some calculations have shown me if I calculate poles for PDs the same way as for the houses that there will be a difference of a couple days. Around my chart, I got 1 day, 4 days, 10 days, 18 days. Could be more when I direct something with a vastly different declination(maybe just over a month-i'm guessimating). Pluto for example, or towards old age when such a direction could be closing.

The question: knowing that the objection in point(1) can be remedied, should it?

Hello Ariondys,

Re: "The question: knowing that the objection in point(1) can be remedied, should it?"

Your mileage may vary, but I say if it ain't broken, don't fix it.

The timing for Primary Directions to (Topocentric) House Cusps is functioning correctly. +/- 1 month for all aspects except Conj/Opp... and +/- 2 months for those two aspects. Because events are normally spelled out in several aspects and in several systems, usually the Overlap Method and/or Lunar Cycles will more tightly define the timing.

Take care

James

Hello Juan,

Thanks for the extra events...

I added 3 more events (the engagement, the move, and the last (greatest) from the list of presentations.

This addition, didn't change the Polaris results, so in the absence of more events, I would stick with what I already gave before... 24? 35' Virgo.

If you happen across another major event and are curious, just list it and I'll show you the Primary Directions and Secondaries for the event.

Take care

James

Atlantean wrote:This addition, didn't change the Polaris results, so in the absence of more events, I would stick with what I already gave before... 24? 35' Virgo.

Thanks a lot, James.

This Asc puts the birth time around midnight, which is the correct time from the biographical record. There is a letter from Sibelius' father stating that he was born "at half-past twelve" or 12:30 a.m. (the letter doesn't say a.m. or p.m., but his own secretary assumed a.m., probably from Sibelius himself)

In GMT the Asc 24,35 Virgo is 23:40 of the day before, or 00h18m LMT Dec 8, 1865 (24e24/61n00).

So, James, you have given an excellent demonstration of how well Polaris works.

As I mentioned my interest is to compare this result with what can be obtained using other choices to calculate the primaries. I will examine the relevant directions using the topocentric system (zodiacal, Naibod arc, Asc/MC added as promisors but no house cusps as promisors for the moment).

After examining the relevant topocentric directions for some key events(with my own software, presumably reproducing the ones used by Polaris), I will (or at least will try to) look for other birth times near the same range that are also possible and result in similar tight orbs.

Any suggestion by James about which event(s) could be the best place to start is much appreciated.

Juan