Luminary signs when big events occur?

[Jim Eshelman]

Apr 08, 2017

This could all be a coincidence - I don't know if it could hold up in the future - but there is a surprising large unbalance in the distribution of Moon by sign when major events occur.

Of the current SMA event catalogue of 300 events, we have 269 event that can be called "bad events" - the usual list of taking everything except the space race events, the British royal events (a mix of good and bad and indifferent) and the peace events under War & Peace, minus two that are so inspecific that Moon-sign isn't certain. Of these, every sign should have about 22 occurrences.

However, Moon is in Gemini 37 times. The chance of Moon being in Gemini 37 times out of 269 is not quite 1,000-to-1.

Now, if this is a real effect, the next natural question is high. Two theories come to mind, and I favor the second one.
(1) Does Moon in Gemini mark more news-oriented days - days on which things that happen are more likely to make the popular news and history books?
(2) Is this a subtle consequence of the architecture of these ingresses? For example, does this mark the last-ditch opportunity for a Caplunar to have an effect without intrusion by the Canlunar?

Of course, it could be a coincidence. I need to look a little further.

[Jim Eshelman]

When I add all events for which a Moon-sign is clearly known, the effect continues. This could be simply because the bad events overwhelmingly outnumber the good ones, continuing the trend; or for either of the reasons I gave above; or for other reasons.

In any case, when all the events are added in, the effect gets even stronger. 41 occurrences of Gemini Moon out of 295 events gives a z-score of 3.46, which exceeds the 1,000-to-1 mark (3.29) that the earlier sample fell just short of. This remains the only significant individual figure in the set.

[Jim Eshelman]

I would not expect as reliable a result from Sun distribution because, ironically, even though these are entirely sidereal phenomenon, there are "tropical" - that is, seasonal - patterns to be overcome, and I have no easy way to filter these out at present. For example, earthquakes, hurricanes, and even financial panics have seasonal patterns. Nonetheless, I decided to check the Sun-sign distribution for the same catalogue of 300 events.

We find a quite different pattern. This difference may question whether the Moon affect above is real, or may be independent of it. Interestingly, here is no "seasonal wave" evident (a pattern where two or three or four adjacent signs are collectively rather high or rather low). The results mentioned here may, of course, be coincidence, may (as I tentatively think) disclose something about the architecture of the ingress pattern, or may relate to something else.

Here are the interesting results: Out of 300 events, about 25 should occur with Sun in each sign (except I've weighted for the uneven time Sun spends in each sign).

SUN SHOULD BE IN ARIES 25 times out of 300, and we find it there 42 times. The odds of Sun being in Aries so often (=3.45) exceeds 1,000-to-1. NB The United States has a history of major events immediately after the Arisolar, so this is interesting. Part of the excess was adding a few events, back at the beginning, to create a side-study in these just-post-Arisolar events. However, only three or so were added that I might not have added anyway. Adjusting for this, we still have a huge, statistically anomalous surplus with Sun in Aries.

SUN SHOULD BE IN LEO 25 times out of 300. Instead, we get 39 (z=2.83), which exceeds the 100-to-1 level. However, there is a good chance that this excess is tipped by hurricane season in the northern hemisphere.

SUN SHOULD BE IN CAPRICORN 24 times out of 300, and it is there a mere 8! (Just 8!) No other sign has single digits; in fact, the next-lowest are the two on either side 18 in Sagittarius and 19 in Aquarius. The Capricorn drop-off is huge and (z=3.45) would happen by chance much less than 1 time in 1,000

So we have this interesting situation where the least number of erupting events is in the first 30 days after the new Master Chart of the Year occurs, and the most such events occur in the first month after the next solar ingress (the quarterly Arisolar) appears.

Other than the Sun in Leo anomaly (which I think is a quasi-seasonal effect), all of these Sun and Moon irregularities are right at the turning-point of an ingress phase. I find this thought-provoking, though, as mentioned, it may amount to nothing actual.

So... I posted it to provoke some thought.

[Jim Eshelman]

I just realized there's an easy way to explore the question, "Are all those Gemini Moons examples of events racing to happen before the Canlunar comes into play?" We can assess the Caplunar performance for those 41 events nd compare it to Caplunar behavior distributed around the month.

For the current set of 300 events, the Caplunar is dormant 26% of the time, and the non-dormant examples are +1 or better 92% of the time (+2 or better 69% of the time).

Using only the 41 examples with Moon in Gemini, the Caplunar is dormant 8 times (20%, which is a smaller percentage than in the full 300 events). Of the 33 events with non-dormant Caplunars, scores are +1 or better 90% of the time, and +2 or better 70% of the time. This is essentially identical to the earlier results.

I'm not sure what conclusions to draw from this. The results are quite good in the sense that Caplunar performance is quite good anyway. However, if these were really "events rushing to happen," I would have guessed the results would be slight better (which is hard, when they are this good anyway).

The other fair contrast, I think, would be to events with Moon in Cancer, in the sense of "So, what would have happened to that Caplunar power if you'd waited until the Moon got into Cancer for the event to manifest?"

Moon is in Cancer 31 times for the 300 events. For 9 of these events (29%), the Caplunar is dormant. Of the remaining 22 events while Moon was in Cancer, the Caplunar was +1 or better 21 times (95%). Furthermore, 59% were +2 or better.

We have to be careful of false inflation from rounding errors. Notice that a negligible difference of 1 event (20 out of 22 at +1) would have dropped this to 90%. Similarly, adding 1 to the 14 that had +2 scores would have lifted the percentage to 64%, not all that difference from the 69-70% of the other studies.

So... I don't see a huge difference. Certainly not enough from which to draw conclusions one way or the other.

[Jim Eshelman]

Sounds more logical that it is a "Mercury effect" with the Moon, more events making the news like you said.

As for the Sun in Aries and Arisolar chart...well maybe (just maybe) that is actually the main chart of the year.
I think what you've just stated above gives us a reason to look into it as a main chart.

Jim you said:

So we have this interesting situation where the least number of erupting events is in the first 30 days after the new Master Chart of the Year occurs, and the most such events occur in the first month after the next solar ingress (the quarterly Arisolar) appears.

Many societies actually celebrate a new year in spring:
http://earthsky.org/earth/why-does-the- ... -january-1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_equinox
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Year
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nowruz
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maithili_New_Year
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puthandu

[Jim Eshelman]

As for the Sun in Aries and Arisolar chart...well maybe (just maybe) that is actually the main chart of the year.
I think what you've just stated above gives us a reason to look into it as a main chart.

Fair question. Fortunately, I have figures to give us an answer because I looked at exactly that question a while back. The numbers were given in Appendix C of the last edition of SMA, and I've just finished updating them with the current, larger data set.

When all four solar ingresses are calculated for all 300 events, here are the percentages that each has a +1 score or higher ("on balance, is more descriptive of the event than not") for all non-dormant instances:

Capsolar 188 of 211 89%
Arisolar 157 of 207 76%
Cansolar 203 of 243 84%
Libsolar 174 of 222 78%

The Capsolar is easily the highest score, and the only one of the four to hit the accuracy Tthreshold that has always distinguished reliable techniques.

But we can break it down further with the specific question of how reliable each ingress is across the entire year. Here are the Capsolar and Arisolar figures broken down by quarter. (Q1 for both is the quarter beginning with the Capsolar.)

Capsolar
Q1: 94%
Q2: 86%
Q3: 85%
Q4: 95%

Arisolar
Q1: 66%
Q2: 85%
Q3: 75%
Q4: 68%

The Capsolar is fairly high across the board, regardless of the quarter. (Q2 and Q3 are a little lower than I'd like to see, but none of the other three ingresses reaches the same level outside of its own immediate quarter.) The Arisolar, on the other hand, has its highest score in its own quarter (Q2) and plummets significantly for all other quarters. There is no indication that it has any particular value in any quarter except Q2.

BTW this is echoed in the Cansolar and Libsolar. Each has its highest score (93% and 90%, respectively) in its own quarter, and substantially lower scores in all three of the other quarters. Full numbers are given in Appendix C of SMA.

Many societies actually celebrate a new year in spring:

Those are generally at the equinox, not mid-April, but we can look at this possibility anyway. I know some of the most dramatic events in this set were U.S. - we have this pattern of "just after Arisolar" radical eruptive events - but I didn't tabulate exactly which events made up the Aries collection. Here they are:

Mt. Pelee erupton
1906 San Francisco quake
Nepal Earthquake
Soma coalmine disaster
Benxihu Colliery disaster
Laobaidong Colliery disaster
Great Mississippi River flood of 1927
Red River flood
Rhythm Club fire
Ohio State Penitentiary fire
Cerro fire
Oklahoma City bombing (OK City & DC)
Boston Marathon explosion (Boston & DC)
Titanic sinking
Hindenburg explosion
Yuba City school bus
Sewol sinking
Bombay Harbor explosion
Texas City disaster
Chernobyl
Deepwater Horizon
Abraham Lincoln death
UK for VE day
Fall of Saigon (Saigon & DC)
Bay of Pigs invasion (Cuba & DC)
Columbine massacre
Virginia Tech massacre
Armenian Holocaust
Ludlow massacre
CSA siege (MO & DC)
Waco siege (Tx & DC)
Freedom 7 - Alan Shepard
Savar industrial accident
1837 Panic (NY & DC)
1873 Panic - Vienna

[Jim Eshelman]

Yes, I remember we did discuss something on similar notes a while back... but did you ever explore if the vernal equinox chart has any relevance to the years' events? As in being a major chart for the year?

[Jim Eshelman]

Yes, I remember we did discuss something on similar notes a while back... but did you ever explore if the vernal equinox chart has any relevance to the years' events? As in being a major chart for the year?

I've looked at vernal equinox charts over the years. I'm sure they're valid, at least in a limited way; but for most major events, they simply don't produce much. There are a few famous exceptions.

Astrologers used to think of it as the master chart of the year. Llewellyn George famously led the charge of demoting all equinox and solstice charts to Quarter charts, and that does produce at least slightly better results than treating any of them as Year charts.

[Jim Eshelman]

Yes, I remember we did discuss something on similar notes a while back... but did you ever explore if the vernal equinox chart has any relevance to the years' events? As in being a major chart for the year?

He did. You can use google to locate the thread. (equinox mundane site:solunars.net)

[Jim Eshelman]

Thanks I forgot that, and was about to do it again.

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim wrote:

I've looked at vernal equinox charts over the years. I'm sure they're valid, at least in a limited way; but for most major events, they simply don't produce much. There are a few famous exceptions.

I have a burning question. But first, I need to quote some Fagan words from his book ‘Primer of Sidereal Astrology.’
Under the Chapter on Mundane Astrology, Fagan writes:

It has long been the custom in this branch of astrology to consider maps (tropical) drawn for the time of the entry of the Sun into the cardinal signs, Aries, Cancer, Libra, and Capricorn. Of these, the Aries ingress was by tradition considered the most important and possible to be thought of as the “map of the year.” Led by C.E.O. Carter, astrologers have begun to consider the Capricorn (solstice) as the prime ingress.

Does anyone know why Carter broke with tradition (Aries equinox chart) and started looking at the Capricorn (solstice) chart? I ask this question because it was Carter who first “suggested that if the sidereal zodiac were valid, maps for the entry of the Sun into the constellations of Aries, Cancer, Libra and Capricorn would be of importance.”
Did Carter ever explain WHY he started looking at the Capricorn (solstice) chart vs the traditional Aries equinox chart? IMO, this insinuates Carter may have uncovered some historical evidence the Capricorn ingress was the actual master chart of the year, but mistakenly thought it would naturally be the Capricorn solstice chart as the master chart, since Carter was a tropicalist.

[Jim Eshelman]

I doubt there was any historical reason. AFAIK he was pushing the idea that, as our year now ran from January 1, the Winter Solstice chart was closest to a New Year's Day chart.

Llewellyn George turn out-radicalized Carter by declaring the solstice and equinox charts Quarter charts, and saying there was no sijhle Year chart. As Bradley observed, mundane astrology's old maater chart was demoted 75% in a single stroke.

[Jim Eshelman]

I find it very interesting Carter was the sole person who got Bradley to do his research into the Sidereal Ingress charts. This means it was a tropicalist who was the 'spring board' for us discovering an important mundane secret of nature with the SZ.

[Jim Eshelman]

Carter would have been a Siderealist if politics allowed. His original published statement smoothly endorsed the work with solar and lunar returns. He and Llewellyn George were rather shadow Siderealists of the time.

[Jim Eshelman]

So, both Carter and George had to remain in the shadows of the siderealist camp, in order to maintain their economic demand from the tropicalists, very interesting. I know this, before I discovered the siderealist camp, Carter's astrological writings impressed me from a prediction standpoint.