Werner Heisenberg

[Jim Eshelman]

Dr. Werner Heisenberg, to whom is credited the Uncertainty Principle, was born December 5, 1901, 4:45 PM CET, Wurzburg, Germany according to a biography by David C. Cassidy who reports seeing the birth certificate with time on it.

As I write about Neptune-Pluto natal aspects, I was exploring the possibility that this expresses some form of comfort with the malleability of reality. I wanted to check Heisenberg's chart. His mathematical and physical sciences genius is reflected in his Scorpio-Virgo luminaries and, while I didn't see what I was seeking as I stared at the chart, I did see one clear sign of a radical way of viewing reality and its rules:

23°29' Scorpio - Uranus
24°24' Taurus - Pluto
27°44' Taurus - Ascendant

Not bad! A partile Uranus-Pluto opposition across the horizon. But then I wanted to see how close they really were to the angles and saw that while Uranus is only about 2° in altitude below Dsc (being always close to the ecliptic), Pluto had latitude 9S18 and was much further from the horizon, so I did a full mundoscope... and got a really sweet surprise!

Pluto 7°22' below Asc
Neptune 8°07' below Asc

A partile Neptune-Pluto mundane conjunction in the foreground - the exact aspect I first calculated his chart in order to see!

[SteveS]

[Danica]

I revisited this chart last night, to check, in particular, what are Eris and Sedna doing, and find this very interesting:

After Uranus as closest (2*37' from DC), the next closest-by-orb angularity is:
Eris - being Mundanely below AC 4*28', followed by Sun, M 4*47' below DC; and then come the Ne-Pl at 7*22' and 8*07' below AC, tightly conjunct mundanely as they are (I see TMSA gives a slightly different orbs than SF)

So, the trio of: Uranus-Eris-Sun all under 5* from angles, with Ur leading - very satisfactory for a man whose name is in the public mind practically a synonym for the scientific concept of the Uncertainty Principle!

And another thing that came to my attention: his Novien Moon is at 3*19' Sco: not only conj nat Mercury, emphasizing further the Mo-Me connection which we see already in the eclipto wheel aspects themselves (Mo oct Me 44'), but also the Scorpio as sign, "tilting the scales" clearly more toward it than the Sag, which both are jumping out as important from the simple view at the eclipto wheel, with each having three planets in it.(Without this, we could see the Sco emphasized by the Sun itself being there, yet Sag is almost on-par, with Mars there, as well as Jupiter [- one of four strongest factors related to the Moon] in-own-home.)

[Jim Eshelman]

Eris - being Mundanely below AC 4*28', followed by Sun, M 4*47' below DC; and then come the Ne-Pl at 7*22' and 8*07' below AC, tightly conjunct mundanely as they are (I see TMSA gives a slightly different orbs than SF)

SF and TMSA autogenerate slightly different longitude and latitude (barely different - they use different atlases). If I force the lat/long in TMSA to be exactly what SF uses, they produce exactly the same answer.

So, the trio of: Uranus-Eris-Sun all under 5* from angles, with Ur leading - very satisfactory for a man whose name is in the public mind practically a synonym for the scientific concept of the Uncertainty Principle!

Heisenberg's chart was pivotal in my understanding of Neptune-Pluto aspects. I was already moving in that general direction anyway, but seeing his name on the list just snapped everything in place. The fact that it's a partile mundane aspect and doesn't even exist ecliptically was a bonus, because it's not just something his whole generation experienced but, rather, something that singled him out from his generation. The kickoff idea of Neptune-Pluto aspects is that reality seems unstable, unreliable as an unshifting idea. Everything else I can observe about Neptune-Pluto people is a consequence of how they react to that realization.

Without this, we could see the Sco emphasized by the Sun itself being there, yet Sag is almost on-par, with Mars there, as well as Jupiter [- one of four strongest factors related to the Moon] in-own-home.

Still, I wouldn't mistake this chart for being more Sagittarian than Scorpian. Mars' sign is important, but nowhere Sun in importance IMO. I do like the Scorpio-Virgo luminary pair for Heisenberg, giving a kind of 'mechanical' orientation to the universe - something we often see in significant physicists. As for astrophysics, Sagittarius Sun does give us Brahe, Kepler, and Newton - quite a trio of the celestial sphere! - but Mars in Sag gives no such figures I can find other than Heisenberg. I suspect with Heisenberg it's more about the concept of expanding reality instead of the mechanical astrophysics, since we do find several figures of expanding personal reality, including Timothy Leary and Alan Watts and writers and film-creators like Walt Disney, Francis Ford Coppola, Lewis Carroll, and Steven Spielberg.