SNQ Calculation

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

I found an old thread on exactly this topic that the originator didn't move, but I did as a single post. I've separated the posts out so it's more readable. Hope this helps.


Posted Thu May 05, 2016 12:31 pm by StarAgeWiz
Jim,
Still a bit confused on the SNQ calculation.
Could you please provide a working example?
thanks,
Mike

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Posted Thu May 05, 2016 1:13 pm by Jim Eshelman

StarAgeWiz wrote:
Still a bit confused on the SNQ calculation.
Could you please provide a working example?

How are you calculating this? I'll give an example using Solar Fire, and my birthdata, October 10, 1954, 4:13 AM, Rochester, IN. (We'll pretend I still live there.)

Set Angle Progression (under Preferences) to Mean Quotidian and check the "Standard (Q2)" box.

Select my natal chart, click the "Progress or Direct Chart" button (or click Chart } Trans/Prog, fill in the data for when you want the chart - let's use May 5, 2016, 12:00 PM, same location - make sure "Secondary Progressed" is selected - and click OK.

For the sample, the midheaven is 26°55' Aquarius.

Just to be correct, this should be done for wherever you are at the moment, not birthplace. It was just easier to use birthplace in the example.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Posted Fri May 06, 2016 5:19 pm by StarAgeWiz
Not sure how to use the quote option?

Anyway, after following your directions I came up with the same MC 26Aqa54 as your example.

Guess my confusion comes from Fagan's Primer and the SNQ Susan Walker example.
Using both the Q1 & Q2 Fagan method the sec. prog angles do not at all reflect The SNQ method
you sent me (which I've experimented before).
Also tried to match the SNQ of JFK's Oxford, Mississippi showdown 10/01/1962 as calculated by George Whitworth
in SPICA Vol.II ,Number 2 Jan. 1963.which has prog. Mars exactly on the Desc.
Whereas your suggested progression method Mars is nowhere near the Angles i.e. Q2, Day for A year, Natal, nor transits.
Whitworth calculated the SNQ for Birth Place, Brookline. Mass.

So still confused...LOL! thanks for the reply though.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Post Posted Fri May 06, 2016 7:11 pm by Jim Eshelman

StarAgeWiz wrote:
Not sure how to use the quote option?

When you answer a post, start with Quote instead of Post Reply. Then, at the right, click on the hyperlink for BBCode to get instructions on all BBCode options.

Anyway, after following your directions I came up with the same MC 26Aqa54 as your example.

Good.

Guess my confusion comes from Fagan's Primer and the SNQ Susan Walker example.

I don't have a copy handy, but I think Fagan only used the Q1. That is, he applied the Bija correction. It was a good theory, but I don't think we can say it held up over time. Bradley wrote a couple of times that every time he'd run comparative tests, his "best hit" stacked would be about three times as high for the Q2 as for the Q1, and I've seen similar ratios. (But I might be remembering the Primer section wrong, it's been almost 40 years since I looked at it.)

If you give me one example with full birth data and event data, with the MC, I'll calculate and see if I can tell you what's happening.

Also tried to match the SNQ of JFK's Oxford, Mississippi showdown 10/01/1962 as calculated by George Whitworth in SPICA Vol.II ,Number 2 Jan. 1963.which has prog. Mars exactly on the Desc. Whereas your suggested progression method Mars is nowhere near the Angles i.e. Q2, Day for A year, Natal, nor transits. Whitworth calculated the SNQ for Birth Place, Brookline. Mass.

I would never do it for birthplace unless one lived there, but, following the trail, here's what I get:

JFK's SNQ for noon on October 1, 1962, using noon (since you didn't give a time) nd birthplace (since that was the test), gives me Asc 0°34' Aries exactly square transiting Mars at 0°17' Cancer, but not progressed Mars.

Switching to the Q1 doesn't fix anything. Switching to Washington doesn't fix anything. Switching to Oxford, MS starts to look better, but nothing is quite close enough.

I thought maybe this was accidentally the SQ, so I checked that for the same date. No luck. There WAS important Mars: SQ Moon has progressed to 0°00' conjunction with SSR Mars! But nothing on the angles.

So, from what you've told me, this is just an error unless it was really transiting Mars.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Posted Fri May 06, 2016 7:38 pm by Jim Eshelman
I just dug out my copy of Primer. What they describe under SNQ is the Q1 calculation (they use the Bija correction).
So, let's check it.

Susan Walker was born October 8, 1949, 2:33 AM GMT in Kensington, London. The event occurred March 27, 1960, 12:00 GMT, at Blewbury (51N35 1W17).

As a Q1, I get MC 21°15' Libra. Fagan and Firebrace get MC 21°18' Libra. Close enough when comparing hand calculations in the 1960s to computer calculations today.

If you were to do this as a Q2, you'd get MC 0°32' Scorpio. Notice that progressed Mars is 1°06' Scorpio, half a degree from square MC. The Q1 didn't have anything of note. The Q2 is better for an accident.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Posted Sat May 07, 2016 1:34 pm by randallnyc
I think Fagan favored the Q2 over the Q1, according to The Solunars Handbook, page 66.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Posted Sat May 07, 2016 1:55 pm by Jim Eshelman
randallnyc wrote:
I thinkFagan favored the Q2 over the Q1, according to The Solunars Handbook, page 66.

Fagan, most of the time, favored the Q1. According to Bradley in private correspondence, he inherited Fagan's chart files and, from marginalia, saw that Fagan was favoring the Q2 more near the end of his life (though I can't tell that from his published writings).

Where did you find that in The Solunars Handbook? The writings are often confusing on that, so I'd like to double-check it, you might have found a useful reference.

As an example of how confusing this can be, one long-standing ultra-bright and attentive Sidereal astrologer that long corresponded with Fagan told me years ago that he thought the Bija correction resolved the difference between the Q1 and the Q2 and made it the same thing. But it doesn't. It is simply the way of manually calculating the Q1.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Posted Sun May 08, 2016 2:14 pm by StarAgeWiz
Got It! Thanks!

Was using Janus to calculate the Q1 which as it turns out is an error in their programing. Janus's Q2 agrees with SF9's Q2 however.

Yep! the Q2 works much better than the Q1 for Walkers accident.
Along with progressed at Mars 01SCO06 thetr. Mars(for accident) is 01AQA22
and her Blewbury, UK relocated chart has progressed Mars on the I.C. 01SCO39

Also Walker's natal Moon is 1Aries06 a 9th harmonic tie in.

Mike