Midpoint compilation

[Soft Alpaca]

Is there a list of the midpoints and the sign that that are in anywhere that gives the descriptions of the midpoints? What midpoints should one first look at? Any help would be appreciated.

[Jim Eshelman]

The best reference is the book The Combination of Stellar Influences by Reinhold Ebertin. That's the catalogue you probably want. (He's not particularly good with Pluto, given the early date of the book, but the rest is solid.)

However, you can logic these through: Each midpoint represents the kind of energy of the two planets in aspect, and then a third planet is blended in with it.

For example, you have Sun 0°14' from your Venus-Uranus midpoint. Read about a Venus-Uranus aspect and blend that idea with your Sun, or identity-center.

Your Mercury, Mars, and Jupiter, already in strong aspect, are tied together three ways by midpoint. The most direct is that your Mars is at the Mercury/Jupiter midpoint. But also your Mercury squares the Mars-Jupiter midpoint, and your Jupiter squares the Mercury/Mars midpoint. This one is like taking the aspect interpretations of Mercury-Mars, Mercury-Jupiter, and Mars-Jupiter and finding how they coexist. (You'd have this even without midpoints, just because of the aspects.)

Or your Venus is at the Saturn/Pluto midpoint. Take the idea of Saturn/Pluto first, then treat this as modifying your Venus (that one's not so nice). Etc.

[Soft Alpaca]

I like that last one. I don't live for the nice things, life gets a little dull if things aren't rough and I prefer my mood swings over being stable. Saturn/Pluto is a very dark placement survivalist and deconstructing in nature, outside the bonds of society, expecting a highly receptive Venus that's already dark from the double Scorpio/Mars energy acting on it. I have trouble finding Jupiter in anyway personal also still not feeling the sun as the identy center it gives me bad vibes. I think you are the center and the Sun is a tool box containing certain planets as tools and everyone can have different tool boxes (different planets that have planets under them). I think Mars is a toolbox planet in my case and so is the Sun, my preferred tool right now I believe is Pluto (belonging to Mars). I do understand how midpoints work I was looking for a collection of meanings for them so I thank you for offering me the name of that resource.

My Venus/Mercury=Pluto and the Moon would these have much significance?

As for more examples of when the Sun just isn't this center I think we can look at Charts like our very own Veronicas, although her chart is more boldly apparent I think that the neucances matter just as much.

[[Removed]]

I will look into the book if I can't figure it out alone, thanks again Jim.

[Jim Eshelman]

My Venus/Mercury=Pluto and the Moon would these have much significance?

Yes, at least Moon. (I wasn't being exhaustive.) Mo=Me/Ve is 23' wide, but Pl=Me/Ve is 1°24'. The orb for midpoint contacts is 1°00'.

As for more examples of when the Sun just isn't this center I think we can look at Charts like our very own Veronicas, although her chart is more boldly apparent I think that the neucances matter just as much.

I've known Veronica for years, and she's as Aquarius-Scorpio as they come Given your tastes, you are probably also responding to her exactly angular Pluto and her distantly angular Mars. (Oh, but then there's that foreground Sun you dislike so.)

I look at a chart and the Sun isn't at the center, you are at the center and yet we are still toying with the idea of Sun center astrology

Of course you are at the center. But what is "you"? The Sun is function of distinction which identifies you as a distinctive being separate from all others, finding distinction as a solitary, distinguished being (Qabbalists call it Ruach, or the Tifereth center). Moon, in contrast, identifies that faculty of consciousness by which we are connected to each other and the life-sea, our field of subconsciousness (Qabbalists call it Nefesh, or the Y'sod center).

[Soft Alpaca]

You are you. You don't need something being to define you other than your state of being and your ability to continue to exist. How can one thing describe the different distinctions within 8 billion people and yet still apply to all 8 billion of those people. I am a collection of things no predefined by the stars or any higher thing but by accord of actions and recations. Surely there is some people who aren't of the Sun, unless the Sun in and if itself is existence, and if so how can you prescribe certain traits to existence. Just like I don't disbelieve in any religion or form of astrology because they are all equally as measurable in existence and whether they function or don't is honestly a window of perspective. Veronicas chart and mine are similar we both understand each other on a level that is scorpioinc as our planets dance through the sign of Scorpio each set almost cons. each other but just out if reach. My Venus (0) then her Moon/Jupiter/Neptune (7-10) then my Pluto and Chiron (16) then her Mars (22) then my Mercury (29). Her Jupiter exactly sextiles my SN and our Neptunes are exactly sextiled too. If anything by your standards Jim I'm a wrench in your system of astrology that makes it viable (as nothing is perfect and the things that are made perfect are almost always 100% fake). Honestly I like Aquarius energy I just wouldn't say it's her sign as much as Scorpio is. Some form of intuition kept me going so I'll continue to use it, I'm not sure what planet I am under Jim but I have loyalty leaning against my Sun i think it's to Mars and Pluto but at this time I can only say for certain that in this moment I would not consider my main sign Saggitarius who knows what the future will bring, being is becoming.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Scarlet, you're allowed to not believe you are anything like the delineation of your sun's constellation. We'll still accept you here.

But could you please not accuse Jim (or any of us) of "Sun sign astrology" or announce you think you're throwing some wrench in other people's ideas just because they don't agree with what you say? Maybe you don't mean it that way, but it really feels like you're just trying to shut down discussion when people don't agree with you.

On this site, we expect people to behave in a collegial manner even when they disagree with other people. Nobody here is attacking you, so there's no need for you to attack back.

Under Sidereal astrology, and this is a Sidereal astrology site, the Sun was in Sagittarius when you were born. It's ok not to like that, but it's not ok to demand the delineation be changed over your opinion. There are plenty of people who were born under the constellation who read the paragraph on Sagittarius and do see themselves in it.

You're unique, but you are not definitive.

Oh, and just FYI, this isn't a free site. Jim pays for it, specifically as an outlet for his thinking and writing about Sidereal astrology and as a forum for intelligent and progressive discussion of Sidereal astrology. Its ok to disagree, but it's also ok for other people to disagree with you.

[Soft Alpaca]

I like the arguments honestly, it keeps things healthy. Jim pays for this site in many ways I respect the time and energy he has to put into it which is a greater cost than the money. The fortitued alone it takes to run such a thing is probably greater than any amount of disbelief anyone could have towards astrology in general.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Arguing, discussing, debating are all healthy and welcome here. Passionate discussion is fine. We just want to try to keep it kind and respectful to everyone (including you) as well.

Again, you are unique, but you are not definitive.

[Soft Alpaca]

Thank you. Back on topic how would you interpret Pluto/Saturn=Venus in Scorpio ,Jupiter SaD?

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Saturn/Pluto=Venus means Venus is sitting on the midpoint between Saturn and Pluto. What's in Scorpio? Not that it matters. I'd ignore Scorpio in this context unless there was nothing much else in the chart. The planets, their aspects and angularity always take precedence in the way I interpret.
I'd say this was an emotional loner, which says nothing about their sex life.

Depending on the rest of the chart, this is someone who may have had a harsh childhood, and never learnt to trust, and/or may be estranged from others, maybe through their own choice. Context is important. Is this angular? By angular, I mean specifically is Venus within 6 degrees of an angle? Closer is more important.

[Soft Alpaca]

Not angular in my chart. However amazlingly accurate (except for the emotional loner part unless you mean they don't share emotions). Do squares to midpoints apply if so i note that venus is square Mars (in capy) by one degree. The reason why Scorpio would have some importance is due to the fact that Venus is double Mars in Nature.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Yeah, I mean you don't share a lot of emotion. Actually, from what I've seen in your posts, you do, but mostly because it overflows when you get frustrated or upset. But I think in your "real" life you don't let people see what you feel.

I wouldn't count squares to midpoints. but I haven't studied the question.

I have no idea what you mean by Venus being double Mars in Nature, and can't imagine how that could be true. Scorpio is the constellation where Venus was located when you were born, but your Venus isn't angular. I think it's actually background. Your Mars is also background. That makes it hard to express either planet on it's own, and hard to express them in tandem. They sort of build up till they overflow.

That's two overflows, one having to do with emotions and the other with passion.

[Soft Alpaca]

Makes sense. However I express Mars in Capricorn quiet frequently or something just happens to be similar in that planets nature (I may not lie often but I'm not as disclosing as perceived). Vertex angle runs through cancer (anti-vertex in Capricorn) Mars is roughly 10 degrees away not angular but not recessive as you may have thought. Venus in Scorpio is expressed in my style of clothing and aesthetic. Passion is an emotion...

[Jim Eshelman]

A few quick technical responses:

Midpoint conjunctions and oppositions are the same thing - because the midpoint exists equally on both sides of the circle. I consider squares to midpoints indistinguishably strong from the conjunctions and oppositions, so recommend starting on a 90° modulo.

The Cosmobiology school has solidly demonstrated that semi-squares and sesqui-squares to midpoints are quite important and valid also; however, I do experience a significant "stepping down" in shifting from a 90° to 45° modulo. I tend to only actively look at the latter when a planet has no other midpoints, or when I need another modifying layer of information.

JSAD is right, your Venus is background - like your Moon, it is within a degree of being in the exact center of the quadrant (which also puts it close enough to the cadent cusp, where background i maximum). I would call your Mars middleground - very close to a succeedent cusp.

[Soft Alpaca]

Thanks Jim. I enjoy the angularity study we do here. I would say that I am a dominant type of person (I can't rely on others nore do I want to be a burden) feeling small physical makes me uncomfortable but appearing small or weak on the surface doesn't. Interesting that my Mars and Venus appear like systems waiting to burst, and in person I will control them (depending on the sotuation) however I'm lost to the action behind a Capricorn Mars, it seems like I'm very sly about things or i do nothing less than doing a big action. I would call Mars the head of a toolbox (again i don't think it is a tool of the Sun) Venus being in Scorpio and aspecting Mars i think suports this. I would say that the Moon and the sign it's in does feel not as strong to me as say Mars and it's sign or Pluto and it's sign, I think the Moon is in the toolbox of the Sun but it's energy is thrown off due to Plutos effects to it. I will note Moon Pluto midpoint opposition to Jupiter (so saying Pluto against my Sun would be symbolically accurate). I think my Sun being mutable and my Moon being in a background place I feel like my luminaries are manipulated. Like Saturn prevents my moon from speaking up and Pluto makes in ball up negative energy, for my Sun i think that Mars just pushed over it (I feel like Mars pushes my angular Jupiter around). Eventhough its strong my Jupiter is like let's go exploring and adventure and trust in life (in comes Mars with people are manipulative your have to be manipulative back, don't tell them anything.) Mercury of course sides with Mars (ie logically it supports Mars's cases).

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Passion is an emotion...

A specific emotion, while the other is emotions in general.

[Soft Alpaca]

Ok J Sad. I relate to the descriptions of b9th of those planets in their signs, but if you arise they are hard for me to express (neither of them aspect a lumunary or are at a major angle) I would still argue that they are obtainable but not as tools that I can utilise through my Sun sign. I thought Mars was the so called carpenter of Venus in my chart (just as it would be for the planets in Scorpio and Capricorn as it is the ruler of Scorpio and the most personal planet in Capricorn.) I took the Venus/Mars midpoint, it squares Jupiter, again like Pluto/Moon a hard aspect to my Suns ruler.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

I don't know what you're talking about here. Mars is the carpenter of Venus? And your "Sun sign" is not anything. It's your SUN. Period. You're placing way too much emphasis on which constellation what planet is in. The constellations are modifiers. The planets are verbs (not nouns like "carpenter".)
And I really really wish you'd stop talking about how this planet "rules" that "sign" and therefore has anything to do with the expression of planets in that sign. That's horary (spit). It's misleading, at best, to use it in a natal chart (or any chart other than a horary chart.)

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

The best reference is the book The Combination of Stellar Influences by Reinhold Ebertin.

Exactly! Without a doubt Scarlet, be sure and get this book, it’s a bible in multiple ways for many astrologers. Your Sun is the most angular planet in your Natal, and FWIW, imo, your mundo (measures exactly the distance of planets to angles) direct midpoint of Mars/Pluto=Sun (orb 0,48) dominates your Natal Chart. A hell a-lot of your posts reflect this midpoint, and I could definitely understand why you feel a tremendous amount of Mars/Pluto through your core Sun being. Combine this with your partile 1,01 square Moon-Pluto and we can understand why you identify with Pluto symbolism in your life. But you should take JSAD’s advice and completely eradicate the tropical crap of planetary-sign horary from your astrological learning curve—it’s a fiction—but I understand now why you have strongly identified with this fiction seeking the astrological WHY for your identification with Pluto & Mars. Probably the best astrologer on the planet who knows the most about midpoints is Robert Hand, and if he was part of this discussion there is no doubt in my mind, through midpoint analysis, he would concur this Mars/Pluto=Sun direct midpoint dominates your Natal Chart, and it is deeply hidden on the standard surface of your eclipto Natal Chart. Robert Hand writes about Midpoints:

One neglects direct midpoints at one’s peril; if you use no other type of midpoint, use them.

[Soft Alpaca]

I hadn't even noticed that midpoint... I never learned any horary lol. My Sun doesn't have any hard aspects should I read about Sun Mars and Sun Pluto and just put them together to find out more or would this be pointless? All astrology could he a fiction as could life... would this midpoint also explain my liking to Scorpio (and Aries)?

[Soft Alpaca]

Can someone please explain the mundo and how my Sun =Mars/Pluto? I know how to do natal midpoints I don't understand how my 22 degree Mars/Pluto= my 10 degree sun...

[Jim Eshelman]

I hadn't even noticed that midpoint [Ma/Pl=Su].

I'm not sure what Steve is shooting at here. Your Mars/Pluto midpoint is 22°57' Sagittarius. Your Sun is at 10°33' Sagittarius. The only partile midpoint I see to your Sun is Venus/Uranus.

I never learned any horary lol.

But you invoke it quite often. It's inherent any idea of "rulerships" or "dispositorships" other than similarities of symbolism/ You invoke these quite often.

[Soft Alpaca]

Because in my mind the planets are all like physical beings, the signs are there aesthetics and they have relationships with each other through aspects. So when I say Mars is exalted in Capricorn i really mean he's happy because he's in a place more comfortable than even his own home.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

You learned horary thinking you were learning astrology. It's all that the ruler of the second house is the depositor of the planet Phlemegial (Buy my ephemeris for Phlemegial, only $50!) and Venus is in Scorpio so it rules Mars, and dampness, so you're in hot water. And the answer to your question is (drum roll please!) your shoelace is under sister's bed and your dog is cross town having a beer

Mundo is our Steve's shorthand for in mundo which is Latin for "of the earth". It's the same as saying "mundanely". When we talk about mundane measurements we mean measurements taken along the prime vertical. If it's not specified, measurements are taken in longitude (in eclipto) and that's how almost everyone who does astrology measures everything.

You can read up on celestial coordinate systems in Wikipedia.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Because in my mind the planets are all like physical beings, the signs are there aesthetics and they have relationships with each other through aspects. So when I say Mars is exalted in Capricorn i really mean he's happy because he's in a place more comfortable than even his own home.

But you don't say Mars is exalted in Capricorn. You say Mars rules Venus because Venus is in Scorpio. Mars isn't exalted in Capricorn. Mars is exalted in 28° of Capricorn. There's a lot of stuff on this site about the origin of the exaltations. You can read about the Hypsomata (Exaltations) in Fagin's own words here.

[Soft Alpaca]

My Mars is one degree off of 28 degrees Capricorn...

[SteveS]

*** MIDPOINT TREES ***

Scarlet - Z-Analogue Prime Vert

Modulus 90°00' - Max Orb 1°30'

*Sun*
Mar/Plu +0°48' d

Jim, Scarlet's Mundo Pluto 30,46 above horizon, Mundo Mars 33,03 below horizon, Sun 1,30 below horizon. Scarlet keeps saying how her being relates so much to Mars- Pluto-Scorpio. When we do a Mundo Midpoint Tree Z-Analogue Prime Vert (Natal Mundoscope) in SF quoted above, it calculates a partile (less than 1 degree) direct midpoint for Mars/Pluto=Sun. Because her Sun is the most angular planet tight cnj Asc, the Mundo Mars/Pluto =Sun potently is connected through her angular Sun, according to Hand's midpoint principles. This explains to me why Scarlet strongly relates to the symbolism for Mars- Pluto-Scorpio in her life. But, it is becoming obvious Scarlet needs some more Sidereal Astrology maturity before she will be able to understand where we are coming from with our explanations. But yes Jim, her 'Poser'/Facade is getting very tiring for my 70 year age.

[Soft Alpaca]

Title claiming may be posing. However the traits I display are not. Except for how I act in front of people sometimes (I force a smile frequently). Call me a poser if you must. I never claimed I was a Sun sign Scorpio, I have said that I feel a lot of Mars/Pluto and Scorpio energy. I must say that my almost exalted Mars (1 degree away from exlation) in Capricorn has to say something about my willingness so be deceitful, my moon uses confidence and radiance as a cover, and my Sun uses technicalities. Pluto floods the radiance cover frequently (I have mood swings and can only keep compose for a certain amount of time).

Muti-layer the masks till even you don't know the truth. I wish I could say I'm this cool poser, but irl im not, i just dont relate to the traits perscribed to my Sun, so im a sag who doesnt realte to sag thats probably it, but its more fun ti cause a ruckus, and because of my experiences I don't want to be the traits that are applied to my sign, the seem very dull and i do live on the wild side in my alone time. I can give you a scope of my tendency to withhold things if you wish that is all, however it's in this composer that I know how truly valid my Mars in Capricorn is...

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim, Scarlet's Mundo Pluto 30,46 above horizon, Mundo Mars 33,03 below horizon, Sun 1,30 below horizon.

Though it's possible I've missed out on something, I really don't see that mundoscope midpoints are where we should be looking (unless an angle is involved).

Scarlet keeps saying how her being relates so much to Mars- Pluto-Scorpio. When we do a Mundo Midpoint Tree Z-Analogue Prime Vert (Natal Mundoscope) in SF quoted above, it calculates a partile (less than 1 degree) direct midpoint for Mars/Pluto=Sun.

Sounds like you're feeding the zoo animals - taking someone who admits that he's in it because he loves a fight, who has been primarily antagonistic since arriving, and trying to feed him something to gratify his deluded, juvenile self-image.

If we found something supporting that self-image in a technique we already know to be valid - evidence based - that's one thing. But making up something new to feed it? That seems... questionable.

But yes Jim, her 'Poser'/Facade is getting very tiring for my 70 year age.

Someone who has experienced a lot of pain wants to {nass} on society rather than admit that their essential nature is to be a caretaker and bearer of cultural heritage. I understand. He isn't the first teenager that wants to slap society in the face, and, in the long-run, it's not necessarily a bad trait. But I won't twist astrology to make excuses to justify it.

Sorry, I'm just getting really fed up with someone who comes here admittedly just to pick fights instead of to learn.

[Jim Eshelman]

Title claiming may be posing.

Being an oh-so-dark-and-brooding mystery dude when it isn't you real nature is also posing.

I never claimed I was a Sun sign Scorpio, I have said that I feel a lot of Mars/Pluto and Scorpio energy.

No, you've said much more than that. You haven't just expressed your feelings: You've insisted that there must be someway in which you are actually a Scorpio, and you have a fairly Tropical-infused idea of what "Scorpio" must be like. To you, it's not a sign - it's a cosmetic role.

[Soft Alpaca]

I'm what they call an intimate learner, I have to be bonded to my teacher or subject I'm learning. I have come here to learn, in fact I've already picked up on a lot, in slowly taking what I learn here and teaching it to tropical astrologers on other forums using what you teach me to start to convert them over... Note how I'm not trying to cause any old conflict, just on things that I have experience in (like myself who I've been living with for the last 19 years). Your allowed to be fed up with me, I wish you would have told me sooner that it was upsetting you that much. (I learn so well because I do have a connection with you, and I feel bad for upsetting you). I'm not here to upset anyone but rather the energy of the site (there's not anything wrong with it but I am testing it a little sorry it's second nature I don't mean too). I will say Jim I've raised two kids and that the image I'm putting off Is ascew. I don't want to slap society in the face Jim It does that well enough on its own, I want my space from it that's all.

[Soft Alpaca]

It's called obsession and I know I have it. Your wrong in saying I haven't just expressed my feelings, I actually haven't I'm afraid too because people tell me they are too much to handle. I don't express them in public let alone in front of people I don't know. When you have to grow up fast and be the mom and dad you don't have time to express anything, you have to be strong. You have to appear string. I'm afraid you would use my feelings against me, or worse leave me because of there strength, like many have done and will continue to do. I'd rather be hurt and abused than abandoned however, which is probably why I'm saying all of this.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Steve, Mars and Pluto are too far away from the angles to give accurate measurements in the mundane chart. The prime vertical analogue only works with planets that are close to the angles. Midpoints between planets that far away from the angles can't be calculated in the mundane framework, and may not be true or useful even with planets on the angles. I'm pretty sure midpoints need to be calculated in longitude.

[SteveS]

JSAD wrote:

Steve, Mars and Pluto are too far away from the angles to give accurate measurements in the mundane chart.

JSAD, are you saying the mundo midpoint of Scarlet's Mars/Pluto midpoint in her Natal Mundoscope is not accurate?

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

I'm saying I wouldn't attempt to use midpoints away from the angles in a mundane chart, and since Jim also doesn't appear fond of the idea, you might want to take another look at it, with an eye to what we know should be measured along the prime vertical. Would you measure a trine along the PV? Why not?

[Jim Eshelman]

Speaking as cautiously and agnostically as possible... the only thing that has distinguished itself as clearly effective in this regard are foreground planets that have a midpoint on an angle. This may be a real midpoint effect, or it could be something similar-but-different, such as finding a point of equilibrium between when the two are exactly angular, some point of maximum shared effect. (It looks the same but has a different theory. Speaking agnostically, we can observe their importance but not be sure of the mechanism.)

Logically, and on very limited evidence so far, I'm leaning to the idea that midpoints involving angles themselves something like X = Angle/Y) should be measured in the framework where contact with the angle exists, For Asc and MC, this would be the mundoscope. I consider this line of thought exploratory.

There is, of course, a lot we still don't know.

I tin Steve was approaching this by saying, "Here is a person who self-describes as very Mars and Pluto in nature, and we don't see it the chart as we're used to it. Is there anyplace I can find some Mars + Pluto? This makes the Sun = Mars/Pluto look attractive to him, and I understand. I think I winced hardest at it being presented as if we already knew this kind of measurement works. I haven't seen any work thus far to suggest that we know this at all.

[Jim Eshelman]

PS - The Pluto quality, of course, is not hard to find at all, with Moon square Pluto nearly partile. That's been there from the beginning. I keep coming back to wondering how much of this Scorpio identification comes from mistakenly seeing Pluto and Scorpio as similar. ("Feels like Pluto, must be Scorpio!") The Pluto side of this chart has never been a mystery, and the corresponding struggle against civil institutionalism not a mystery even for a Sagittarian.

[Veronica]

"Veronicas chart and mine are similar we both understand each other on a level that is scorpioinc"

I actually think I am more inclided to say, I dont relate or understand to other scorpios well beacuse it seems to me that they have a wonderful potential to understand the mystreries of life and death....but in society it seems they just get stuck in shallow sex behaviors, cultural programming, or such rebelliousness that they are to wreckless to be around. I own those traits and strive to rise above thier limits.

I also think that I dont like many other scorpio strong people, beacuse they, like me, are full of themselves at times and very ego proud of thier scorpioness , like they are members of a secret club.

I am what I am, and I identify First with my rising sign and then Aquarius and then scorpio. I think my rising sign is that which gives me balance between my two strong aspects.

[Soft Alpaca]

Interesting veronica. I understand what your saying.

Jim

Scorpio Mercury:
SUMMARY (Preliminary): Outspoken, opinionated, candid. Enjoys mental/verbal competition (arguments or humor). Needs intellectual freedom, resists mainstream ideas & institutional thinking. Mind sharp, strong, strategic (fault-finding). Strains nervous system (nervous irritation). Good singing voice.

I not only use astrology which is off mainstream, I use sidereal astrology even more off beat, and I don't believe in this system I just like learning about it (and I see it differently than others here). I've could sign at the age of 5 (the chorus to american pie). Enjoys arguing is obvious...

Not only this but I'm phobic of small places and being trapped or restrained, to the point where it can effect my relationships with others. I don't like feeling small either again effecting relationships. (I don't like being held, don't like being dependent etc.) Locked rooms from the outside, being bound, etc also mess me up.

Outside of the claustrophobia, onto the freedom in the sign, yes I want to be left alone at times, but most of it is just room to run amuck.

I guess too that I've learned how to be civil to some extent and I choose not to be, where would this lie?

[Jim Eshelman]

Civil? Well, you're a Sag-Leo
Choose not to be? Moon-Pluto square.

[Soft Alpaca]

*Forced to be...

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

I not only use astrology which is off mainstream, I use sidereal astrology even more off beat, and I don't believe in this system I just like learning about it (and I see it differently than others here).
....
I guess too that I've learned how to be civil to some extent and I choose not to be, where would this lie?

It's under the sign of the troll.

You just came out and said your purpose here is not to learn about Sidereal astrology, but to argue, and you demand we put up with it because that's just how you are and you can't help yourself except when you can.

People are not here to amuse you. You like to argue, but other people don't, and trying to force them into it is rude. This is not a debate club. Please stop trying to use it as such.

[Soft Alpaca]

Again I am actualy here to learn. However I do like to argue or so in told. (It looks cooler if i say im here to argue).

[mikestar13]

Let me summarize what I think I know on this topic, and ask a few question.

The basic formula is A/B=C where A, B and C are points in the chart, / represents the midpoint between and = is a 0-45-90-135-180 aspect between C and the midpoint between A and B. The maximum orb is +- 1 degree.

0-90-180 aspects are measurably stronger than 45-135 at the same orb. Twice the strength, perhaps?

Strength-wise how would you assess A/B=C vs D aspect E, assuming comparable orbs, say both 0 degrees 0 minutes?

Faced with A/B=C (and assuming we don't just look it up in COSI), we first interpret A/B as if it were A aspect B, then use that to color the interpretation of C.

Where A, B, and C are all planets, there is no question of how to proceed: We calculate in longitude, and interpret as above.

Now what if A is an angle, with B and C planets. Do we calculate in PV and interpret as B foreground coloring C?

If A is the Eastpoint specifically, do we calculate in RA?

Now what if A and B are planets while C is an angle, what do we do?

What about if two factors are angles?

Does ASC/EP make any sense at all?

Should we even consider midpoints involving the EP?

[Soft Alpaca]

Well what per tell would we be doing taking the East point and putting it with the A.C., this would make a EPAC/WPDC line (another angle) highly specialized at that. Would would this specific specialization be ?

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Well what per tell would we be doing taking the East point and putting it with the A.C., this would make a EPAC/WPDC line (another angle) highly specialized at that. Would would this specific specialization be ?

He's talking about measuring along the Prime Vertical, not about conflating the Ascendant and Eastpoint.

[Soft Alpaca]

Sorry I got lost in translation.

[Jim Eshelman]

Good summary of what we think we know. Now, for the questions, as best I can...

Now what if A is an angle, with B and C planets. Do we calculate in PV and interpret as B foreground coloring C?

I think midpoints involving angles should be measured in the same framework that planetary contact with the angle should be measured. I think I can say with high confidence (based on the extensive mundane astrology work) that this is at least true in the scenario of P1/P2=A.

This still produces many scenarios (which I lay out in detail in the front, and through successor examples, in SMA. It means that midpoints to horizon and meridian should be measured in PV longitude, those to EP-WP in RA, and those to "squares to the angles" (which are ecliptical phenomena) in longitude. Additionally, since transits to angles (including quotidian angles) are measured in longitude, those midpoints should be measured in longitude also (except EP-WP, which don't really exist as longitude at all and are purely equatorial [RA] phenomena).

We are on less certain ground with midpoints in the form of A/P1=P2. In theory, I think these should follow the same principle, e.g., the midpoint of Ascendant and Saturn should be measured in the mundoscope (PV longitude). This flies in the face of the whole history of Cosmobiology, including decades of my own relying on ecliptical midpoints in that form, so it would require a huge amount of data to displace the traditional (ecliptical) method. Ebertin ha thousands of examples. OTOH, just because we've thought a certain thing to be true and Ebertin had thousands of examples doesn't mean it's necessarily true, so I consider this an open question I've just started to examine. I remain agnostic on it.

If A is the Eastpoint specifically, do we calculate in RA?

I'll start by saying that whenever I do a midpoint scan of a chart, I get the Eastpoint put of the way and ignore it completely. The one exception, though, is in mundane astrology where I'm looking at very tight (generally 2°) orbs, and midpoints of planets on EP taken in RA seem to tighten and clarify the contact. In this scenario, I'm not taking midpoints of just any two planets but, rather, only of those already conjunct the angle. This means that the item seeming stronger when their midpoint is mere minutes from the angle might be something other than a midpoint effect, e.g., there could be an independent value in the two planets being closest to the mutual greatest strength in relation to that angle. So i can't take these observations as clearly answering your question.

Now what if A and B are planets while C is an angle, what do we do?

That's the easy one, answered above.

What about if two factors are angles?

I question the value of these midpoints entirely. Consider, for example, that the only example of this the Ebertin school ever employed would have been A/M, a midpoint that necessarily falls in a part of the quadrant that we know is one of the weakest; and yet, on midpoint theory, we expect their midpoint to partake of the nature of the two angles combined, right? I don't see how this possibly could be (especially if it turns out that - ta-dum! - we are to measure midpoints involving horizon and meridian in PV longitude, in which case their midpoint is always, be definition, the exact center of the each quadrant!).

Does ASC/EP make any sense at all?

There is no framework in which they both exist at the same time. Either could be put into the framework of the other - e.g., the RA of Ascendant can be calculated, or the PV longitude of EP - but these points alone do not show value, so why should they be valid midpoint anchors?

Should we even consider midpoints involving the EP?

Answered above.

[mikestar13]

Thanks for the detailed reply Jim. My focus has always been on natal astrology and SSR/SLR. So I'll leave aside all midpoints involving the EP. I will also ignore A/M and any other midpoint involving 2 angles. Those combinations involving one angle will be calculated in PV long. I have some software to write.

[Jim Eshelman]

Since my Mercury is 0°17' from A/M in longitude, it would be hard for me to argue against that midpoint's value... if I weren't a Virgo. Mundanely, it's almost exactly the same, with Mercury 14°34' into the 2nd House, i.e., 0°26' from A/M mundanely.

In general, though... possibly the one thing we most solidly know in all of astrology is the importance of angularity, including the fact that somewhere between the angles this expressiveness is least. It might be (as I believe is true for natals and returns) at the cadent cusp, or it might be (as Fagan seemed to think was true, and as seems to be true for ingresses) mid-quadrant. Either way, mid-quadrant comes out as a weak, anti-angular region. To put four points at the centers of four quadrants that theoretically partake of the quality of the two angles... that seems like it can't be so.