Are you familiar with Geodetic charts?

[rcooke13]

I ask because an astrologer told me that I should not move to New Orleans or ATL or the south in general because on my Geodetic charts for these southern places, I have a major square to the 8th house cusp, and it involves my sun and/or moon. He said it's a bad thing because people usually get killed in such places, and examples of this is John Lennon and JFK.

Are you familiar with Geodetic charts? If so, does this sound right? Is it strongly recommended that we not live in a place that has a major square to the 8th house cusp in the geodetic chart? Or would you say it's not a big deal, or not dangerous for us to live in such places? Is this something I should be taking seriously?

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Yeah. Those are also called 'local space' charts, and are drawn in azimuth (the Horizon system.) They're more geomancy than astrology. It's like a compass with you at the center. It's fun to use them in decorating, in the same way you'd use fung shui.

I can't imagine a "major square to the 8th house cusp" being valid in any kind of chart. Cusps don't take or make aspects. There are enough indications in both JFK's and Lennon's charts of what happened to them (hint: they didn't just "die." They were assassinated.) there's no need to drag in a whole other system of coordinates to explain it.

I would say it's not much if it's anything at all.

[rcooke13]

Yeah. Those are also called 'local space' charts, and are drawn in azimuth (the Horizon system.) They're more geomancy than astrology. It's like a compass with you at the center. It's fun to use them in decorating, in the same way you'd use fung shui.

I can't imagine a "major square to the 8th house cusp" being valid in any kind of chart. Cusps don't take or make aspects. There are enough indications in both JFK's and Lennon's charts of what happened to them (hint: they didn't just "die." They were assassinated.) there's no need to drag in a whole other system of coordinates to explain it.

I would say it's not much if it's anything at all.

He mentioned John Lennon and jfk as examples.

At this link is my local space chart with azimuth houses. https://imgur.com/a/CEc757D

Do you see a major square to the 8th house cusp?

Also, would you recommend against living in an area where your 8th house line goes through like it shows in the map (atl and New Orleans)?

[Jim Eshelman]

"Geodetic" is used by astrologers to label lots of different things that have no particular relationship to each other. JSAD is correct, though, that the version you mean (as reflected by your link) is an azimuth map (the measurement of planet positions around the circle of the horizon). It's too bad people have started calling these "geodetic charts" because they historically had their own name that was less confusing.

So... first to clean up the language, then to address whether they have relocation value. Oh, but first let's clear up your worst concern:

I ask because an astrologer told me that I should not move to New Orleans or ATL or the south in general because on my Geodetic charts for these southern places, I have a major square to the 8th house cusp, and it involves my sun and/or moon. He said it's a bad thing because people usually get killed in such places, and examples of this is John Lennon and JFK.

I suggest you ignore that concern. There is a lot wrong with this claim: First, there is only weak evidence that houses have any importance at all, and, in particular, when I do find natal houses descriptive of people's lives, I quite specifically do not find shifted houses positions for locality to mean anything at all. (My own chart is a straightforward example: In Los Angeles, where I've lived for 45 years, my Sun moves into the 2nd House and there is probably no astrological factor that less describes me than Sun in the 2nd House. (That's just the most obvious example of several in my chart.) I wander my eyes around my wife's chart for LA (where house positions are mostly the same for all of California, where she has spent most of her adult life): the changes from her birthplace houses do not describe her adult life (including in LA) and give really wrong information (while her birthplace house positions are reasonably descriptive of her whole life). If I relocate her chart to the one place on Earth she nearly died from a sudden (temporary) health matter, I do find her Saturn exactly on an angle and a 0°00' mundane Mars-Uranus conjunction, but none of the houses describe her general time there (except, one could argue, her Venus-Neptune opposition along the 3rd-9th cusp axis for what she's always described as an enchanting place to travel).

These are isolated cases - single cases are always questionable as "proof" - but they show the type of thing that has convinced me there is nothing to relocated house placements as all.

There are other problems with the above idea. If we were really talking about azimuth charts, the idea of "squaring a house cusp" makes no sense at all. (There aren't really house cusps in azimuth astrology unless you take up the Horizon system that divides the horizon itself into 12 segments.) This made me think that the detail you quoted wasn't really about azimuth at all (not about the shooting-out lines you showed in your example). So, I calculated John Kennedy's natal for Dallas and John Lennon's for NY.

I think the person who made the statement to you about a geodetic chart having squares to the 8th cusp especially involving Sun or Moon was being very sloppy in language (and, therefore, probably sloppy in thinking). It seems he or she is using "geodetic chart" just as another term for "relocated chart," and was being too general.

Take JFK for example: I don't know what house system your source might have been using, but in JFK's case it doesn't matter: His house cusps are very nearly 30° in every house system. (This happens when, as in his case, the MC is at one of the solstice points, placing one of the equinox points on Ascendant.) For example, his 8th cusp is 6°43' Aries in Campanus, 6°22' in Koch, 3°45' in Placidus, 2°34' in Regiomontanus, etc. Since his Saturn was 3°34' Cancer, I suspect your source uses the Placidus house system and was just saying that, in Dallas, JFK had Saturn square the Placidus 8th cusp. - This has nothing to do with azimuth charts at all!

We can use John Lennon's chart to test this supposition: Sure enough, John's 8th cusp for NYC in the Placidus system was 20°25' Cancer and his natal Jupiter was 19°47' Aries, square Saturn at 19°18' Aries.

Your source seems to be saying that any planet square the locality chart Placidus 8th cusp can get you killed.

The problem with this is when we take the test back to your chart. Relocating your chart to New Orleans, your Placidus 8th cusp is 28°31' Aries, which doesn't aspect anything in your chart at all. Ditto Atlanta, where the cusp is 2°25' Taurus.

Setting aside the fact that Placidus is the single easiest house system to reject (since it totally collapses and can't exist in some parts of the globe), the information you quoted is inconsistent, insufficiently explained, and therefore doesn't seem reliable - certainly not enough to worry about getting killed.

[Jim Eshelman]

So, let's go back to other things astrologers have described as "geodetic charts" or "geodetic astrology."

First, the azimuth chart, of which you showed an example. This used to be called a Local Space Chart. It caught fire in the early '80s when I was working at Astro Computing Services, and Neil added it as an option people could order and buy. The theory was interesting: Because azimuth literally describes direction (as on a map or compass), then the direction each planet was located when you were born might describe what anywhere in that direction from you would be like. There were a lot of individual cases that caught people's imaginations, e.g., one astrologer at a convention told me she'd had three fender-benders along the direction-line from her home where Mars was at birth.

At ACS we began selling local space maps on plastic transparencies (we had an early printer-plotter that could print on sheets of acetate or something similar). People could lay these atop any map - national, world, their local town - and get their direction lines.

I was excited by the concept, and then not impressed with the result when I tested it on and off over the years.

In Solar Fire, you can get these maps by clicking on astro-mapping, then click Lines and select "planet directions." In my case, this just doesn't match my experience of any place I've been where the lines fall. My wife, who travelled much of the world in her early years, doesn't have these lines match her experience - some locations are quite wrong in their descriptions! - except she does have her Sun line wrap around the world and pass through central France and along most of the length of Italy - that might describe her experience there (but no more than how most people would enjoy those areas).

Astrologers who were really into Local Space Charts did similar charts from their current (relocated) residence, e.g., from my home in LA one would see where the planets were on the horizon for this spot (in order to see how the different parts of the city would treat me). For over a decade I was making court appearances at numerous locations around LA and Orange counties and one might think that the specific courts where I nearly always won would be in a benefic direction, while those where I usually did worse would be in a malefic direction - but none of that was true.

So... despite my original curiosity and optimism for this technique, it just doesn't hold up in examples I've seen. BTW, checking the examples you offered, JFK was born with Venus in the same direction as Dallas, so one would expect it to be a primarily Venus experience there. John Lennon had no lines really close to New York, despite the city's great importance to him over the course of his career. (He had a Neptune line off the SE coast that then cuts through Florida.) You have Mercury-Neptune lines passing through Atlanta, while New Orleans is between Mercury-Neptune to the north and Saturn to the south, which would make that an undesirable place if this technique had any value.

I don't think this technique has any value.

[Jim Eshelman]

There is one other use of "Geodetic chart" worth describing, even though - let me be clear - I have absolutely no confidence in it and think it a piece of junk that arose from very narrow, European chauvinistic ideas that likely have no connection to nature. Nonetheless, this is the technique originally called the Geodetic chart, and that name even survives in Solar Fire to this day.

The theory is this: The zodiac wraps around Earth so that every longitude on Earth has its own Midheaven (for all people, for all charts, etc.). The most common form of this places the vernal equinox (Tropical 0° Aries) at geographic longitude 0°00' - the line right through Greenwich, outside of London - and then goes east around the equator wrapping around the globe. You get this chart in Solar Fire if you click for a relocation chart (Shift+F12) and pick Geodetic Chart from the menu. Every Geodetic chart for the same location has the same Tropical angles, different Sidereally according to precession.

This has soooo many things wrong with it in theory, plus it doesn't work in practice.

Using the two examples you offered, JFK's Moon was near Descendant for the Geodetic chart of Dallas, putting his Moon-Venus as the strongest factor. While his enormous popularity showed, there, it isn't the main thing that happened to him. John Lennon's Sun was on NYC's Geodetic chart WP, and this does reasonably describe the Beatles' breakout fame in that city at the eruption of Beatlemania, but less so his withdrawal and retirement there as a place of refuge later in life.

You can play around with it yourself, of course, but I think you'll find it is quite fictional.

This technique has many variants. Different astrologers picked different starting points. The most interesting (and not so locked into British pride) is the theory that the star Aldebaran is assigned to the longitude of the Great Pyramid in Giza. (My friend Steve would love this as a theory, but I think he'd quickly conclude that it doesn't work). In modern times, that differs by a little more than one sign from the 0° = London theory.

Furthermore, while the basic theory reasonably wraps the celestial equator around the equator (changes in Right Ascension of MC), some astrologers (laziness? ignorance? conviction?) wrap the ecliptic around Earth's equator.

Furthermore, in Solar Fire there is a flexible User Geodetic option that lets you use any starting point on the globe you want.

[Jim Eshelman]

Finally, an example of how to use the User Geodetic to calculate the "Aldebaran on Midheaven at
Great Pyramid" model. (Again: I think this is worthless, but it's worth letting you draw your own conclusions.)

The Great Pyramid of Giza is located at 31°08'03" East longitude.

Aldebaran's right ascension changes constantly because of precession. In Solar Fire, under Pages (for a given chart), there are several pages for fixed star data. (I have my own custom reports created, but there are standard ones.) For example, for your chart, click Pages, under Stars pick Star Listing, find Aldebaran on the list and see that the R.A. column has 68°51'.

The task is to put RA 68°51' on the MC for 31E08 longitude. (RA decreases as you go west.) The way to do this calculation is: Subtract Giza's east longitude (31°08') from Aldebaran's RA (68°51') to get 37°43'. In Solar Fire, click to run a relocation chart (Shift+F12), chose User Geodetic (R.A.), click OK, and type 37W43. Click OK. The resulting chart is your "Aldebaran on MC at Giza" base chart. You can then relocate this to any place you want on Earth.

It's a pain, but that's how you do it.

A classic example: The U.S. birth chart on the Aldebaran-Giza-Geodetic cusps for Washington, DC. The U.S. birth chart is July 4, 1776, 12:14:42 PM LMT, Independence Hall, Philadelphia, PA. Aldebaran's RA was 65°46'. Subtracting Giza's longitude, 31°08', gives an adjustment of 34°38'. Calculating a User Geodetic for 34W38 and with Washington, DC selected gives an impressive example (it impressed Edward Johndro, which set him down this path): With Ascendant 16°27' Taurus rising in the DC Geodetic chart, it places Uranus on Ascendant for the Declaration of Independence chart. (For Philadelphia, the Asc is 19°20' Taurus.)

The Geodetic chart theory is that all transits to the Washington, DC geodetic angles (Asc 16°27' Taurus, MC 23°11' Capricorn) would be sensitive transits for anything happening in Washington, DC.

[rcooke13]

Finally, an example of how to use the User Geodetic to calculate the "Aldebaran on Midheaven at
Great Pyramid" model. (Again: I think this is worthless, but it's worth letting you draw your own conclusions.)

The Great Pyramid of Giza is located at 31°08'03" East longitude.

Aldebaran's right ascension changes constantly because of precession. In Solar Fire, under Pages (for a given chart), there are several pages for fixed star data. (I have my own custom reports created, but there are standard ones.) For example, for your chart, click Pages, under Stars pick Star Listing, find Aldebaran on the list and see that the R.A. column has 68°51'.

The task is to put RA 68°51' on the MC for 31E08 longitude. (RA decreases as you go west.) The way to do this calculation is: Subtract Giza's east longitude (31°08') from Aldebaran's RA (68°51') to get 37°43'. In Solar Fire, click to run a relocation chart (Shift+F12), chose User Geodetic (R.A.), click OK, and type 37W43. Click OK. The resulting chart is your "Aldebaran on MC at Giza" base chart. You can then relocate this to any place you want on Earth.

It's a pain, but that's how you do it.

A classic example: The U.S. birth chart on the Aldebaran-Giza-Geodetic cusps for Washington, DC. The U.S. birth chart is July 4, 1776, 12:14:42 PM LMT, Independence Hall, Philadelphia, PA. Aldebaran's RA was 65°46'. Subtracting Giza's longitude, 31°08', gives an adjustment of 34°38'. Calculating a User Geodetic for 34W38 and with Washington, DC selected gives an impressive example (it impressed Edward Johndro, which set him down this path): With Ascendant 16°27' Taurus rising in the DC Geodetic chart, it places Uranus on Ascendant for the Declaration of Independence chart. (For Philadelphia, the Asc is 19°20' Taurus.)

The Geodetic chart theory is that all transits to the Washington, DC geodetic angles (Asc 16°27' Taurus, MC 23°11' Capricorn) would be sensitive transits for anything happening in Washington, DC.

Thank you for the detailed explanations. So his concern is not valid thing. That's very good to hear because I was so set on moving south and nowhere else.

And the fact that the 8th house is running through Atl and New Orleans is not valid either right? Cause astro.com says those areas are about death and hidden secrets, etc. Based on your explanations, I should not worry that the 8th house is running through those areas because houses in relocation is not really valid, and local space is not reliable. Am I correct?

[Jim Eshelman]

Right.

[rcooke13]

Right.

When it comes to relocated charts, are the planetary aspects valid? For example, in my natal birth chart I have sun square ascendant which has given me some troubles. In my relocated birth chart for atl, I do not have that aspect. Is that valid?

Also my ascendant changes, according to the relocated chart. Is this valid too?

[Jim Eshelman]

When it comes to relocated charts, are the planetary aspects valid? For example, in my natal birth chart I have sun square ascendant which has given me some troubles.

Angles don't make aspects. However, squares to angles are actually other angles. Squares to Ascendant are the true longitudes of the Zenith and Nadir. For example, with your natal Ascendant at 7°48' Libra, your Zenith is 7°48' Cancer (not to be confused with Midheaven at 12°20' Cancer) and your Nadir is 7°48' Capricorn (not to be confused with your IC at 12°24' Capricorn). So, while angles do not make aspects, "squares to Ascendant" are really other angles, and are valid.

However, you have some views of this that I challenge. First, these only have an orb of 2° or maybe 3°. Your Sun is nearly 5° from square Ascendant, which is far too wide. Besides, your Sun is already acutely angular, being only 0°04' from IC, so it doesn't matter if it's on another angle. You are acutely solar.

Also, if you did have "Sun square Asc" (really meaning "Sun on Nadir") within a close orb, this wouldn't be a bad thing that would "give you trouble." (It's not really a square, and squares aren't "bad aspects," just strong aspects.)

I'm not sure what kind of trouble you think this has caused in your life: Whatever it is, something else in your chart speaks to it. Your Sun, though, is one of the best parts of your chart!

In my relocated birth chart for atl, I do not have that aspect. Is that valid?

You don't have it in your birth chart either, and, if you did, it isn't the bad thing you think it is anyway.

However, to answer your underlying question: You never lose anything from your birth chart. It never "goes away" when you move. You just add new layers for a new location. You're always the same basic person you always were.

Also my ascendant changes, according to the relocated chart. Is this valid too?

I've never been able to tell that a new Ascendant sign at a new location contributes anything. If it does, it's subtle. There might be something to do, but I tend not to look at it.

Some people think that my acquiring a Leo Ascendant on the West Coast shows a "dramatically different me" than my natal Virgo Ascendant. If there is anything to this, I don't think it's the Leo Ascendant but, rather, that the star Regulus is 0°19' from my Ascendant in Los Angeles. My wife acquired an Aquarius Ascendant on the West Coast (compared to her Taurus rising in her birth place) and, while I'm sure she experiences more social freedom and other things on this side of the continent, she was already pretty Bohemian when living in Greenwich Village.

I don't see that you have a different Ascendant sign in Atlanta. You are probably still using the Tropical zodiac, which I don't think is valid at all. In the Sidereal zodiac, your Ascendant is 3°51' in Atlanta and 7°48' Libra in Durham.

[rcooke13]

When it comes to relocated charts, are the planetary aspects valid? For example, in my natal birth chart I have sun square ascendant which has given me some troubles.

Angles don't make aspects. However, squares to angles are actually other angles. Squares to Ascendant are the true longitudes of the Zenith and Nadir. For example, with your natal Ascendant at 7°48' Libra, your Zenith is 7°48' Cancer (not to be confused with Midheaven at 12°20' Cancer) and your Nadir is 7°48' Capricorn (not to be confused with your IC at 12°24' Capricorn). So, while angles do not make aspects, "squares to Ascendant" are really other angles, and are valid.

However, you have some views of this that I challenge. First, these only have an orb of 2° or maybe 3°. Your Sun is nearly 5° from square Ascendant, which is far too wide. Besides, your Sun is already acutely angular, being only 0°04' from IC, so it doesn't matter if it's on another angle. You are acutely solar.

Also, if you did have "Sun square Asc" (really meaning "Sun on Nadir") within a close orb, this wouldn't be a bad thing that would "give you trouble." (It's not really a square, and squares aren't "bad aspects," just strong aspects.)

I'm not sure what kind of trouble you think this has caused in your life: Whatever it is, something else in your chart speaks to it. Your Sun, though, is one of the best parts of your chart!

In my relocated birth chart for atl, I do not have that aspect. Is that valid?

You don't have it in your birth chart either, and, if you did, it isn't the bad thing you think it is anyway.

However, to answer your underlying question: You never lose anything from your birth chart. It never "goes away" when you move. You just add new layers for a new location. You're always the same basic person you always were.

Also my ascendant changes, according to the relocated chart. Is this valid too?

I've never been able to tell that a new Ascendant sign at a new location contributes anything. If it does, it's subtle. There might be something to do, but I tend not to look at it.

Some people think that my acquiring a Leo Ascendant on the West Coast shows a "dramatically different me" than my natal Virgo Ascendant. If there is anything to this, I don't think it's the Leo Ascendant but, rather, that the star Regulus is 0°19' from my Ascendant in Los Angeles. My wife acquired an Aquarius Ascendant on the West Coast (compared to her Taurus rising in her birth place) and, while I'm sure she experiences more social freedom and other things on this side of the continent, she was already pretty Bohemian when living in Greenwich Village.

I don't see that you have a different Ascendant sign in Atlanta. You are probably still using the Tropical zodiac, which I don't think is valid at all. In the Sidereal zodiac, your Ascendant is 3°51' in Atlanta and 7°48' Libra in Durham.

Wow. According to sidereel, I'm a Capricorn sun and moon. All my life I thought I was an Aquarius sun and moon. At first I thought no way, but then I read up on it and it does sound like me. I always thought Aquarius fits me very well, but reading the sidereel version of my chart, what I felt was Aquarius-like sounds like it's actually all the Sagittarius in my chart.

It looks like maybe the issues I have, like people seeming intimidated by my demeanor, may be my sun and moon in capricorn, and my pluto in the 1st house? And people being turned off and offended be me (my ideas and opinions and expression), that may be all the Sagittarius in my chart then. I guess I have my answers there, thanks to sidereel. maybe also because in New England, I have Pluto square mc line up here too. And the 2 moon lines I live under up here makes me more sensitive. So I guess those are the issues I'm seeing.

Do I follow whole signs too?

My moon sq pluto orb is wide, but I feel that intensely within me. I also feel more like a scorp ascendant than a Libra ascendant. My saturn conjunct venus is wide, but I feel that strongly too. At first I didn't really see my intense emotional and loving nature in my sidereel chart, but Pluto in the 1st might explain that part.

So I guess the answer to my original question, in atl I may have the same issues if I don't learn how to settle down my all my Sagittarius in my chart, and my pluto in the 1st. But not having the Pluto square mc and moon lines down there like i have up here, will hopefully make it all easier.

[Jim Eshelman]

[ANSWER STILL IN PROGRESS OF BEING WRITTEN]

Wow. According to sidereal, I'm a Capricorn sun and moon. All my life I thought I was an Aquarius sun and moon. At first I thought no way, but then I read up on it and it does sound like me. I always thought Aquarius fits me very well, but reading the sidereal version of my chart, what I felt was Aquarius-like sounds like it's actually all the Sagittarius in my chart.

It looks like maybe the issues I have, like people seeming intimidated by my demeanor, may be my sun and moon in Capricorn, and my Pluto in the 1st house? And people being turned off and offended be me (my ideas and opinions and expression), that may be all the Sagittarius in my chart then. I guess I have my answers there, thanks to sidereal.

I'm glad this serves you I thought I'd done a small work-up on your chart somewhere on this site: I'll post something in a bit in the "Discuss Your Own Horoscope" forum.

Do I follow whole signs too?

Whole Sign houses? We're not all that sure how important houses are in the first place, but I've seen so many examples of Whole Sign houses seriously mismatching someone's life that they're about the worst system. (I just was with a friend this morning who is a vivid, dramatic example of a 5th house self-expression and totally mismatching a 4th house character: In Campanus, as in most systems, he has a 5th house stellium that falls into 4th house in both Whole House and Equal.)

We use Campanus for a variety of reasons - especially for accurate expression of angularity.

If we grant weight to houses, your chart is going to be, first, heavily 4th house expressive based on both luminaries not only in your 4th house but on your IC. (Sun is 0° from IC.) If we grant weight to houses you would similarly have a 3rd house emphasis with five planets there.

My moon sq pluto orb is wide, but I feel that intensely within me. I also feel more like a scorp ascendant than a Libra ascendant.

I agree that your Moon-Pluto is wide but "countable." It's under 6° and both planets are foreground (near angles). While your Sun is strongest by angularity and Moon next strongest, Pluto is only about 9° below Ascendant. (It's closer than it looks in the zodiac, because your Pluto is over 15° north of the ecliptic.)

My saturn conjunct venus is wide, but I feel that strongly too. At first I didn't really see my intense emotional and loving nature in my sidereal chart, but Pluto in the 1st might explain that part.

Pluto isn't "emotional and loving" - you have a Tropical Scorpio idea about that (and remember: Tropical Scorpio is what Tropical astrologers call Sidereal Libra!). Your Venus-Saturn conjunction is a little closer than your Moon-Pluto and mundanely it's a lot closer (under 3°).

I'll do a workup of the main points of your chart. It won't be a full synthesis and won't include wider, weaker factors, but it might give you a stronger starting place.

[rcooke13]

I checked it out, thank you.

Is 700 miles from a line effective? Can I feel the effects of a line that's 700 miles away? Someone said a line has an orb of influence of 700 miles.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

A 700 mile orb is about 700 minutes of arc, or more than 11 and a half degrees. What we've seen as valid here is 50 to 75 miles either side of the line, or about a degree orb. So 100 to 150 miles total. Some people feel the western side of the line is "stronger" than the eastern, but I haven't seen any statistics for that.

If you're comfortable with wider orbs, your mileage will vary accordingly. But more than 11 degrees seems a pretty big stretch.

[rcooke13]

I must be very susceptible to very wide orbs then because the pluto square mc and Pluto AS line has to be waaaaay more than 150 miles from where I live, and I experience the effects of both lines very much, including the 2 moon lines too I'm sure.

[rcooke13]

And I don't think it's a placebo effect, cause I discovered my lines after the events that happened in my life.

[Jim Eshelman]

I must be very susceptible to very wide orbs then because the pluto square mc and Pluto AS line has to be waaaaay more than 150 miles from where I live, and I experience the effects of both lines very much, including the 2 moon lines too I'm sure.

Pluto square MC I would never go past 2°. Pluto on Asc could reach as far as 10° away but it would be very weak.

If you like, please list the specific city (since "New England" is broad) and the specific traits that you think of as Pluto. (I noticed before that you had a view of Pluto that I simply think is wrong. Mentioning specific traits gives us something to work with.)

[rcooke13]

I didn't really say what my view of pluto was. My view of pluto is hidden truths coming to light; changing for the better even thought it's very painful; destroying what was wrong and wasn't working, and then rebuilding something that is genuine and works; intensity. All of those things can make anyone emotional and intense; it an give one an intense, uncomfortable energy. I think my view of Pluto is correct. I definitely understand Pluto. I think either I mistyped or was misunderstood. But I understand pluto.

I lived in Taunton MA for most of my time here. I am in Fall River, MA now.

Going back to the lines: pluto square mc is what I described above, only it would have to do with career and success and people. I think it brings success and power somewhat, if it's the right thing, but I think it also brings tension in the workplace; like some people are intimidated, or feel the energy or are attracted and curious. Some people don't like the energy and so they don't like you. I also think if you are pursuing a career path that is not genuine or that is ego based, things will go wrong, and then it will be built back up once you find the true career path and do things for the right reasons. And you'll have a lot of fortitude and energy to get through those situations. I've had all of these situations happen. I was trying to buy a house and everyone I worked with and every route I took, I could not succeed in it. I was also scammed when I was trying to get into a career field that was strictly about money for me and nothing else. I got scammed and now I am paying off debts for that mistake. But I also have experienced success in my career field that fits on my life's path; when I follow that path, I have risen in the ranks and I feel I have found some power and success in that other field, the right one. So I'm focusing on that one now and not money-motivated things. I was lost for a while and didn't know what I wanted to do and now I know, and I am finding I'm getting help and support for that thing, whereas the wrong thing (money motivated) got me no support, and it got me scammed and into debt. So I had those lessons and transformation there. There were also family secrets that were brought to my attention, brought to the light (family, childhood abuse stuff, trauma, etc) that were brought out that I wasnt aware of before moving to this line, and so relationships were broken and were worked on and put together again. I absolutely believe that was definitely pluto. I was a mess from what was brought to light, ruined, but the whole thing transformed me and made me a different person, one with boundaries for my family, and it taught me to love myself more and stop giving so much to family or feeling guilt for family when none of the childhood trauma was my my fault. I had to accept it and learn to move on and take care of me and not the family; I transformed. It was a huge transformation and I experienced a ton of hurt from it. It had to have been those pluto lines.

As for Pluto AS, I think it is more so the image of oneself and how you project it out into the world; how others see you and respond accordingly. So you may see that people have issues with how you express yourself out into the world; truths from this may come to light; how you interact in the world ruins relationships before they can begin, and then transformation within yourself happens to change all of that; you change for the better in that category, the self expression, self image things. You might see things about yourself that you don't like or want to change, and so you do change them. And people may see or feel that you're intense, and feel your energy too and be intimidated, or attracted (or fatally attracted), or curious, etc.; it can attract intense people or situations. So I've had many instances of turning people off or intimidating people, or relations will be ruined before they begin, or relationships have power struggles and never work out; or intense people will be attracted to me; just a lot of those intensity issues, and looking at how I'm coming off and changing myself to lessen these issues. It has happened a LOT. It has to be pluto to be happening so much. I try to change and think I have transformed in that way too. At the same time, these issues seem unavoidable and I dont care anymore, im leaving. But still, I feel I have the strength and fortitude to get through all these issues. I've also isolated myself some too. I think all of these situations are the pluto lines. These situations are the main themes to my life and are repeated, noticeable patterns.

The moon lines I think makes a person more sensitive and emotional and in touch with their emotions; and they easily feel other people's energies too. But it can affect people's home lives and their comfortability. It has affected my home life negatively. I am overly sensitive, vulnerable, and I feel everyone's energies. I cannot make a comfortable home up here either, I feel uncomfortable, feeling and energy-wise, and home-wise. There's just too much intensity in the energy up here. Too much heaviness. And I see things that others do not; like, I see the nasty truth about things that others don't. I feel it when I get on a plane and travel down south because everything feels less heavy, and more lighter when I leave this place and go west and south. Then when I get off the plane at home again, in NE, I feel heavy and dark again. I don't feel comfortable or interested in putting down roots up here or settling down with a spouse up here; not only can I not keep a relationship, I feel things are unstable and uncomfortable up here, like I dont belong. But I would put down roots and settle down south though.

Lastly, I feel pushed to leave; called to leave. I do not feel like I belong up here, or that I am meant to stay living up here. I wanted to leave and move south in 2015, and the interest has increased over the years; it's been something I've resisted again and again; the desire doesnt go away, it just gets stronger. A friend who I knew for a while, who I didnt speak to for years, came out of the blue one year recently and told me I need to move down south and to not stay up in NE (he lived in NE too and moved south). The fact that he came outta nowhere after years just to tell me that, I feel I am being called to leave. A family member also told me I should leave sooner than later after I told her I was going to leave in my 50s ( am 30).She said why wait? You can leave in your 30s, dont wait for the life you want to live, live it now. I just kept getting these messages to leave. I think that also must be a pluto thing.

With all these situations though strongly being a theme in my life for the past 11+ years, I do not believe I havent been affected by the pluto (and moon) lines. I had to have been affected. It only makes sense.

[Parto]

[redacted]

[rcooke13]

I'm pretty sure it's the lines I'm living under. And a lot of that isn't from me, it's outward forces.

[Jim Eshelman]

Thanks, rcooke13. That was quite good.

As for the technical elements:

I lived in Taunton MA for most of my time here. I am in Fall River, MA now.

Using Taunton as a working base, you have a couple of Pluto possibilities, both of which are weak because they are wide.

In Taunton you have Pluto on Eastpoint in longitude (i.e., square MC) within 2°57'. I don't generally see this working past 2° so I'm skeptical of that.

You also have Pluto on Eastpoint in Right Ascension (conjunct the point historically called Eastpoint). The orb for this is 2°18'. This way of measuring seems to have a wider orb, i.e., preferably within 2° to be strong but, at a weaker level, reaching 3°, so I count this as valid (just weak).

I think the first one doesn't count at all, and the second one is a weak showing, but there is a third factor: Pluto is only 3°12' below Ascendant! (It's far, far closer than it looks by longitude.)

In Taunton you also have Sun square Ascendant, i.e., on the Nadir, within 0°14'. This is strong! It is decisively the strong planet defining you in that location.

Finally, Moon is 2°27' off the IC, which is quite close.

So, the main feature of the area is Sun - overwhelmingly strong. Moon is also in the "very strong" category. Pluto on Ascendant is not quite in that "very strong" zone, but is close to being so, and comes in third.

You draw excellent theoretical distinctions between Pluto to MC and Pluto to Asc, but I don't find these hold up in relocation work. The important fact is Pluto to an angle, where it indeed is (on Ascendant).

I'm not sure where the 700 miles distance (isn't that what you said?) came from. Your Pluto is rising roughly south (a little to the west) of St. John, New Brunswick. Passing Massachusetts, it's less than 200 miles from Taunton.

[rcooke13]

Thanks, rcooke13. That was quite good.

As for the technical elements:

I lived in Taunton MA for most of my time here. I am in Fall River, MA now.

Using Taunton as a working base, you have a couple of Pluto possibilities, both of which are weak because they are wide.

In Taunton you have Pluto on Eastpoint in longitude (i.e., square MC) within 2°57'. I don't generally see this working past 2° so I'm skeptical of that.

You also have Pluto on Eastpoint in Right Ascension (conjunct the point historically called Eastpoint). The orb for this is 2°18'. This way of measuring seems to have a wider orb, i.e., preferably within 2° to be strong but, at a weaker level, reaching 3°, so I count this as valid (just weak).

I think the first one doesn't count at all, and the second one is a weak showing, but there is a third factor: Pluto is only 3°12' below Ascendant! (It's far, far closer than it looks by longitude.)

In Taunton you also have Sun square Ascendant, i.e., on the Nadir, within 0°14'. This is strong! It is decisively the strong planet defining you in that location.

Finally, Moon is 2°27' off the IC, which is quite close.

So, the main feature of the area is Sun - overwhelmingly strong. Moon is also in the "very strong" category. Pluto on Ascendant is not quite in that "very strong" zone, but is close to being so, and comes in third.

You draw excellent theoretical distinctions between Pluto to MC and Pluto to Asc, but I don't find these hold up in relocation work. The important fact is Pluto to an angle, where it indeed is (on Ascendant).

I'm not sure where the 700 miles distance (isn't that what you said?) came from. Your Pluto is rising roughly south (a little to the west) of St. John, New Brunswick. Passing Massachusetts, it's less than 200 miles from Taunton.

I'm surprised the sun is giving me issues since I thought my sun was aspected well in my chart. That surprises me. I'm glad in atl the sun backs off a lot. And no moon or pluto down there too. So I feel good about this. It must be so that I will have an easier time in atl than up here. It must be! Too much energy up here for me. Even though a lot of these issues have been within the past 11+ years, I've lived up here for close to 20. It will be a nice break being away from all this energy after close to 20 years. I'm SO looking forward to it.

[Jim Eshelman]

Any astrological factor can operate in a positive or negative way (and usually will do a bit of both at the same time).

Your Sun is fine. It's only significant aspect is the moderate conjunction with Moon. The point is that it's STRONG - birth at birth place and (separately) at residence, so it's going to ignite STRONG solar behaviors in you, some of which will give others a positive impression of you while other behaviors give a negative impression of you.

[rcooke13]

Any astrological factor can operate in a positive or negative way (and usually will do a bit of both at the same time).

Your Sun is fine. It's only significant aspect is the moderate conjunction with Moon. The point is that it's STRONG - birth at birth place and (separately) at residence, so it's going to ignite STRONG solar behaviors in you, some of which will give others a positive impression of you while other behaviors give a negative impression of you.

Wow, yep. This really did happen to me, looking over my life here.

Astrocartography is real!

[Jim Eshelman]

Yep.