Measuring Mundane Vertex contacts

[Jim Eshelman]

I've talked about this subject before... I've slightly evolved my theoretical view... and we don't have enough experimental evidence to say, one way or the other, how conjunctions or oppositions to the Vertex should be calculated.

I found (theoretically) a better way to do it in Solar Fire, and I found an interesting chart to demonstrate - It's the upcoming Canlunar, where I just happened to have Vertex turned on as a display point when I popped it up. I got quite a surprise, so I'll offer it as an example. If you want to follow along, the Canlunar occurs December 15, 2016, 11:49 PM EST, Washington, DC.

First a reminder of what the Vertex is: The Prime Vertical is a great circle that rises due east and sets due west, passing directly overhead and underneath, i.e., through the Zenith and Nadir. The plane of the Prime Vertical is always at right angles to both the plane of the horizon and the plane of the meridian. Where the ecliptic crosses (intersects) the Prime Vertical, we mark the Vertex (on the west side) and the Antivertex (on the east side). If contacts to the Vertex are to be measured mundanely (as with all other angles), the question is how to do this.

#1. Zodiacal Conjunction
Contacts could be taken just by ecliptical longitude. This would be different from the way any other angle works, but I mention it because it's how Vertex contacts have been taken historically, and is at least a possibility. (I allow a maximum 3° orb for Vertex contacts.)

In this case, Neptune is 1°19' from conjunct Vertex in longitude. In contrast, Mars is 10°32' in longitude from Vertex. (Why do I even mention Mars? You'll see soon.)

#2 Azimuth
The way I have been estimating mundane contact with Vertex so far has been realizing that a planet on Vertex or Antivertex if conjunct Prime Vertical, meaning that the planet is on the due east / due west axis. This means it has an azimuth close to 90° or 270°. Solar Fire shows that, in the sample chart, Neptune has an azimuth of 268°47' and - surprise! - Mars has an azimuth of 271°59. Both are close to 270°. In experimentation over the last year or so, it seems that about a 5° variance in azimuth is more or less about where a 3° orb in conjunction falls.

#3 Measure Around the Meridian
This would be the purest way, I think, but we don't have a way of doing it. That is, in the same way that we measure proximity to horizon or meridian along the Prime Vertical (which is at right angles to them), we could measure proximity to the Prime Vertical along the meridian. However, we don't presently have a tool for this. [UPDATE 5/14/22: I recently solved the math on this and have a simple equation for it.]

#4 Prime Vertical Amplitude
I just discovered we have this option. It is the distance above or below (actually, north or south) of the Prime Vertical. It is analogous to altitude above and below the horizon. Now, here's the cute thing: When dealing with bodies that are close to the horizon, altitude is always nearly identical to distance from the horizon along the Prime Vertical! Similarly, PV amplitude, for bodies that are close to the PV, would be very close to (nearly identical to) measuring the distance along the great circle of the meridian as mentioned in #3.

In Solar Fire, under "Harmonics, Transforms & Analogues," we calculate PV longitude (mundoscope positions) using "Z-Analogue Prime Vertical." Immediately under this is "Z-Analogue PV Amp." This is the value we want. Calculating this chart, the Vertex and Antivertex will always show as 0°00' Aries (just as a convention). We see that Neptune is 1°11' on one side of the PV, and Mars is 1°49' on the other side.

I think this is the correct way to calculate distance from the Vertex axis, in the same way that altitude is a valid measurement of distance from the horizon.

Along with all of this, we also learn that planets can look like they're a long way from the Vertex (like Mars 10° away in the sample chart) and actually be very close. Mars is as close to the Prime Vertical circle as Neptune, and that's with not much celestial latitude. This alerts us to a whole new dimension of looking at the Vertex.

I submit that, at this point, we don't know whether contacts to the Vertex axis should be mundane or zodiacal, though every other angle works mundanely and one is, therefore, inclined to start with the assumption that the Vertex works this way too.

I might have to look at this Mars placement on Nova's mapping method to better see, geometrically, what's going on.

[Jim Eshelman]

Here is another way to view the same map. The red circle is the horizon. The green circle is the celestial equator (notice that it follows the path of Earth's equator). The gray circle is the Prime Vertical (notice that it passes through Washington, DC, i.e., the Zenith for Washington; it crosses due east and west, and through the Zenith and Nadir. The black circle is the ecliptic (which is why almost every planet seems to be touching it. Where the green, red, and gray intersect - that is, the equator, horizon, and PV - are the real Eastpoint and Westpoint.

Look at Neptune and Mars. See that they are both just barely off the gray circle. They are, therefore, both barely off the Prime Vertical.

[Jim Eshelman]

On a more personal note, I've always considered that my Moon is on Vertex, since they are only 1°12' apart in longitude; but that I didn't think it mattered much, since Moon is angular anyway.

But my Moon's azimuth is 274°11' (still within the 5° I estimated might be equivalent to 3° longitude orb), and Moon's PV amplitude is 4°10'. This doesn't seem particularly close (or, rather, about as close as 4°10' from horizon would be, meaning one might count it but not be too excited if something else were closer).

On the other hand...

My Pluto is 24° from my Antivertex. One wouldn't think of them as connected at all. But Pluto's azimuth is 87°13', or 2°47' off of due-90° (due-east). This suggests Pluto is actually close to the Antivertex. Checking PV amplitude, I see that, indeed, Pluto is closer to the Prime Vertical than Moon is, being 2°22' away, which is quite close enough to be excited about.

So, perhaps, I have Pluto on Antivertex at birth.

[Jim Eshelman]

Well I've been very sure for some time now, about the Vx being an important point in my case and some other up north charts.

How close are those measurements if you cast the Z-Analogue Azi?
I never tried the amplitude measurement.

When I cast my Azi chart, Uranus is the only angular planet.
With a 23.40 birth time, it is within 3, but with 23.23 birth time, it is partile conjunct Vx.

[Jim Eshelman]

I'd say use 3 degrees.

[Jim Eshelman]

Hi Jim, the above is very interesting. Looking at your chart, what does the PV amplitude show at your current locality?

Has anyone else compared birth their natal to relocated PV amplitude?

[Jim Eshelman]

Hi Jim, the above is very interesting. Looking at your chart, what does the PV amplitude show at your current locality?

Nothing is on my Vertex axis for locality.

As important a secondary layer as the locality chart is, I think it important to establish something this experimental in terms of the most fundamental, solid factors first - meaning the birth chart itself, since that is with us our entire lives - without adding collateral layers that are so conditional that they vary with time or place.

[Jim Eshelman]

Thanks.
Thought it was interesting using pv amp pluto is on anti-vertex & you moved to a locality where pluto is angular via mundoscope.

[Jim Eshelman]

This is getting crazy!

I've taken a fresh look at the Vertex for solar and lunar ingresses. I don't have a final opinion on that yet, but I am learning, along the way, just how often planets are "on the Vertex" in the sense discussed here, but are not anywhere close to conjunct it ecliptically. It's quite common. I'm beginning to consider that... just maybe... the times when the Vertex has historically seemed to work might be accidental overlaps with a larger, more important phenomenon, viz., the planets crossing the Prime Vertical.

Consider a Caplunar for January 30, 2003, 9:21:25 PM CST, Houston, TX (covering the month of the space shuttle Columbia disintegration). Aside from the Venus-Saturn-Pluto along the meridian, we have the following. First, longitudes that would not lead you to think anything is on the Vertex. Next, azimuth and (in parentheses) PV amplitude figures that show the planets very close to the Prime Vertical.

Moon 0°00' Cap
Jupiter 18°37' Cancer
Uranus 3°01' Aquarius
Vertex 13°13' Aquarius

These planets don't seem to have anything to do with each other, right? Now see the azimuth...

Vertex 270°00' (0°00')
Uranus 270°33' (-0°29')
Moon 271°43' (-0°50')
Jupiter 92°36' (+1°56')

Yowsa! I'm not sure if these will hold up over time, but this shows a partile (21') Moon-Uranus conjunction on the PV circle. And yet, the planetary longitudes don't show any of the four points having any obvious connection. (I'm not yet endorsing these as being valid in ingresses; there is too little data. The excitement of learning something new is seeing just how often these important-seeming hits occur with no evidence of anything similar in the horoscope. One has to go looking for them.)

I think this deserves attention.

One more thing (and I should have realized this in theory): Planets on the Northpoint and Southpoint (ecliptical square to Vertex, and ecliptical conjunction with the points due north and south on the horizon circle respectively) either always or usually (I don't know yet) also square the Vertex in PV longitude. This makes sense geometrically. For example, in this same ingress,

Vertex 13°13' Aquarius / PV 12°32' in 6th
Mars 14°13' Scorpio / PV 13°32' in 3rd

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim, can you simply explain the difference of measuring by Azimuth vs. Amplitude for the Vx?
I've been using Azimuth, and astro.com does offer Azimuth house system, so I can see it there as well.
Do you see a way to have the Amplitude measurement in astro.com?

I think (especially for the tight orbs) that it's nearly always going to be equal. I was surprised in that last lunar ingress example (with the Moon-Uranus) that there was that much difference. I think generally you'll be fine taking a 3° orb from 90° or 270° azimuth.

Here's the thing: They're both probably not the best method, though the PV amplitude is a near-best, and azimuth appears to approximate it in most cases.

I'm going to ask you to do some visualization - a visualization that will help you in most of these things, and you may already have these visualizations in mind, but I'll run through it quickly. Ask questions if unclear.

Imagine a sphere with three circles all the way around it that are at right angles to it. (These circles are called great circles if they contain the center of the sphere as their center. The best example is Earth's equator, which goes all the way around the sphere and has the same center as Earth, right?)

Actually... to make this a little easier... imagine that we are dealing with Earth. One circle is the equator. One is the circle of longitude that is 0/Greenwich on one side and 180 on the other side. The third is the longitude circle that is 90E/90W. Got that? Notice that they are all at right angles to each other.

Now... same visualization except it isn't the Earth and her longitude/latitude, but the celestial sphere. where you previously saw a horizontal circle for the equator, understand that the horizontal circle is really the horizon. The other two (longitude-based, in the visualization above) are the meridian and Prime Vertical. The meridian passes through the points on the horizon that are due north and south. The Prime Vertical passes through the points on the horizon that are due east and west (analogized to the points on Earth's equator where 180E/W and 0 E/W longitude cross the equator). Notice that the meridian and PV intersect each other at the top and bottom - where the North Pole and South Pole would be on a globe. (These points are the Zenith and Nadir.)

Got it?

We normally measure proximity of a planet to the horizon or meridian by measuring along the PV, which is at right angles to them. But let's look closer at the horizon for a moment. A planet's distance above the horizon, in our practice, is measured by drawing a great circle through it that passes through the planet at right angles to the PV (meaning that the great circle also passes through the northpoint and southpoint, where the meridian crosses the horizon). A different way to measure distance above the horizon is altitude, which is the actual angular height of a planet above the horizon - equivalent to bands of latitude on earth. That is, altitude is measured by a great circle through the plant at right angles to the horizon (instead of to the PV), passing through the zenith and nadir. Make sure you are visualizing the difference of the great circle that marks the planet's distance from horizon perpendicular to the PV (PV long), and the great circle that marks its distance from horizon perpendicular to horizon (altitude).

Now, let's switch this to the PV. Our task is: Find how far the planet is away from the Prime Vertical? The answer depends on how we measure it, but the three kinds of measurements usually produce very similar results in the cases that matter (i.e., planets very close to the PV).

PV amplitude is analogous to altitude. It is measured along a great circle perpendicular to the PV, passing through its "poles," which are the NP and SP of the horizon (horizon-meridian intersections). It may help the visualization to think of rotating the sphere 90° so that the Prime Vertical is horizontal like the horizon.

What I think is the best and most correct way to measure this - but we have no tools available to do this for us - is that the distance should be measured along the meridian, which is at right angles to the PV. In this case, we would draw a great circle through the planet at right angles to the meridian circle, passing through the EP and WP (horizon-PV intersections). This is the equivalent of measuring proximity to the horizon in PV longitude, and I suppose we could call it 'meridian longitude" to give it a name.

Now for the complicated one: azimuth. Azimuth measures the planet's place 'around" the horizon. Draw a great circle through the planet, at right angles to the horizon (the same circle we "measured upward" along to calculate altitude), that also passes through the zenith and nadir. (If the horizon is in the place of the equator on an Earth globe, then these are the lines of geographic longitude by an analogy). They walk all around the horizon, being 0° when due north, 90° when due east, 180° when due south, and 270° when due west. Notice that a planet exactly 90°azimuth is due east, so is necessarily on the Prime Vertical - 0°00' off of it - and a planet exactly 270° azimuth is due west, so is necessarily also exactly on the PV - 0°00' off of it.

here's the complexity: As a planet moves off the PV, the rate at which it moves away in azimuth is slightly different from the rate it moves away in PV amplitude - they're viewing from a slightly different angle. Exactly at the horizon, they will be identical, and the farther they are from the horizon, the more change (at the zenith or nadir, the change in amplitude will stay closer to 0° - visualize this). I don't have an exact formula for this, but one could be worked out.

What this means is that - for planets very close to the PV - azimuth is a reasonable way to approximate the PV amplitude, but it isn't the same. We can use it pretty well (I think, being without SF, you should feel free to rely on it), but it is only an approximation. And, while PV amplitude is the best we can do, I don't think it's the correct method either - I think we should be using "meridian longitude," but we don't have a way of doing that right now. The differences between meridian longitude and PV amplitude will be the same range as the differences between PV longitude at the horizon and altitude - quite close if the planet is nearly at the horizon.

[Jim Eshelman]

I remember you've posted something similar in another thread. Whenever you ask me to visualize things start to spin in my head so I just have google images to help me. There are many pictures there to help with the visualization. And some websites as well.

http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/ast122/lectures/lec02.html
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Amer ... Chapter_15
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Amer ... AMPLITUDES

Amplitude seems to be a mix of azimuth and altitude.

[Jim Eshelman]

I want to give you an update on what I've seen the last few days. Please note that this comes under the heading of inconclusive at this point - it's just some anecdotal observations about what I've discussed above.

As I'm slowly reworking every ingress for every event in Sidereal Mundane Astrology, I'm checking for Vertex contacts except I'm checking for them mundanely - just as with horizon and meridian intersections. One thing I'm finding is that the ecliptical conjunction-opposition with Vertex is only rarely any indication of whether a planet is conjunct it mundanely.

I entered this experiment knowing that how the Vertex works in an individual's natal chart may be quite different from how it works in a mundane chart - different psychological factors involved. I'm mindful that the preliminary study on Vertex in ingresses has shown it to perform so poorly that it almost seems a negation or reversal factor (e.g., most tragic evens tested have a preponderance of Venus and Jupiter contacts to Vx-series, even though they have nearly the least occurrence of angularity for horizon and meridian contacts). I'm ready for the Vx-series to be perfectly valid, but turn out not to be valid in ingresses - that's fine. But the ingresses still provide the best test base because they are the only charts for which accuracy of "birth time" to the minute - event the second! - is always certain.

I'm only including the Vertex-Antivertex contacts and, for now, excluding the Northpoint/Southpoint contacts. These probably operate on a slightly different mathematical model, and I'll come back to them if I find anything of value in this first part.

I'm also looking only in the ingresses, not in quotidians or transits to the solar ingress angles, because all of these are known to work correctly with ecliptical aspects, not mundane - so they're irrelevant to the immediate study.

That's what I've been watching... and here's what I've (casually, anecdotally) seen so far.


First, the fact that a planet is on the Vx-AV is insufficient to take an ingress out of dormancy. Sure, you can find the occasional example that looks impressive, but you can at least as easily find, say, Jupiter on the Vertex for an ugly disaster. The distribution seems random (some of this, some of that), and either doesn't wake from dormancy, or does so and makes the chart wrong. (Except, we still see the prior ingress flowing through, which is would only reliably due if the current one is dormant.)

Second, individual planets on Vx-AV aren't any more impressive. They are at least equally likely to be right as to be wrong, from what I've seen so far.

Third - there is one thing that is starting to excite me, and that may turn out to be a real finding. (Or not. Remember, this is all still preliminary.) It involves a new kind of mundane aspect. Remember, the whole horizon is at right angles to the whole meridian, and both of them are at right angles to the whole Prime Vertical. This means that, if one planet is exactly on the horizon or meridian, and another is exactly on Vx-AV mundanely, they are 90° from each other. So far - no exceptions, so far (which doesn't mean I won't find exceptions later) - such aspects have always been right (i.e., highly characteristic of the event) and often have totally turned the look around.

Until a few minutes ago, the only examples I had seen had involved one planet on PV while another was on horizon or meridian. I just found a different example which was entirely in terms of the PV. It's the New London School explosion. The solar ingresses are absent-to-weak. The only one not dormant is the Arisolar, which has Moon closely on IC, at least reflecting "a children's event." But wait! Mars and Uranus are each only a few minutes from Vertex in mundo. Mars is 0°12' south of the PV, and Uranus is 0°07' north of it. This means they are conjunct within 0°19' in that framework. Mars-Uranus! For an explosion that blew up a school and killed 300 teachers and students! this time, it doesn't tie to a meridian or horizon planet because, though Moon itself is on IC, when we switch to view at right angles to the PV, Moon is 10° away from squaring them. But the Mars-Uranus itself (joined BTW to Sun and Mercury all within 2°) tells the story all by itself.

I've seen several examples so far and, as mentioned above, what strikes me is that they have all been correct - despite the fact that single planets on the Vertex have not been impressive. It takes an aspect - a mundane aspect - to kick this in gear.

Or, so it seems so far.

I'll add a few more quick examples below as I get the chance, but that's the gist of how it looks as of today.

OTHER EXAMPLES:
Cleveland East Ohio gas explosion. The Canlunar was minor, with Sun exactly on MC and a Moon-Sun conjunction. With Pluto 12' from PV, this gives a partile Su -Pluto square exactly on angles, an aspect seen on angles for severe earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, hurricanes and other floods, fires, bombings… all being incidents not far removed from this one.

Clipper Tradewind plane crash. The Canlunar is already quite good enough, with Saturn-Neptune square on the angles. However, with Mercury and Mars each about 1° off the PV. This is interesting by itself, but they also both square Saturn on Descendant. This terms a perfectly lucid chart into a quite spectacular one.

Lac-Megantic train derailment and explosive damage to most of a small down. The Arisolar is already quite good, with Saturn close to IC. However, Pluto is 2° north of the PV, which creates a hidden Saturn-Pluto square that's even better for the large-scale demolition of a town.

For the sinking of the Sewol, the Caplunar is already very good with Mercury and Neptune on IC (Mercury within 1') and a Moon-Mars square. However, add Pluto 7' off PV, and we get an 8' Mercury-Pluto square on angles.

[Jim Eshelman]

But wait! Mars and Uranus are each only a few minutes from Vertex in mundo. Mars is 0°12' south of the PV, and Uranus is 0°07' north of it. This means they are conjunct within 0°19' in that framework.

Ok Jim, so to make sure I am understanding you correctly, are you measuring this in mundo, as in Z-analogue Prime Vert in solar fire, like any other mundoscope - so not using the amplitude now?

To get this exact figure (t's slightly different depending on the scenario), firsts flip it to a Horizontal chart - recalculate for the negative co-latitude - and then take the PV mundoscope of that. I only did this after checking the amplitude, which gave me the real proximity to the PV, and in this case wasn't discernibly different.

[Jim Eshelman]

Arena, it occurs to me (after your questions the other day), I should give you the hard numbers for your chart for comparison.

Ecliptically, you have Uranus conjunct Vertex (2°41'):
20°36' Virgo Uranus
23°17' Virgo Vertex

This appears to be confirmed by azimuth: Uranus' azimuth is 272°43', or 2°43' from due west. Nothing else falls close to 90° or 270° azimuth.

Using PV amplitude, your Uranus is 2°42' north of the Prime Vertical.

BTW, in high latitudes (like Iceland), these will behave much better, since it is much like planets on horizon near the equator.

This may not be relevant, since Uranus is foreground anyway - about 7° below Descendant. But I thought you'd like to compare the numbers.

[Jim Eshelman]

Another ingress example that is complex (sorts out pretty well on analysis, but not too clear at the beginning): The Capsolar for the Deepwater Horizon explosion is already quite excellent, with Uranus closely setting and a foreground 9' Saturn-Pluto square. To this, we add the following. Notice that you can't tell these are Vertex-related contacts until you do more looking:

0°42' Cap Venus
20°27' Can Mars
0°09' Aqu Neptune
4°28' Aqu Jupiter
11°10' Aqu Vertex
28°38' Aqu Uranus

Quite a spread, right? They seem to have nothing to do with each other or the Vertex. But observe the azimuth and PV amplitude. (Anything that looks a little wide in one measurement, I'll italicize.)

Venus 275°30' / 2°46' N
Neptune 270°47' / 0°40' N
Jupiter 269°43' / 0°15' S
Uranus 267°33' / 2°27' S
Mars 87°03' / 2°14' N

These are all within 3° of the Prime Vertical itself, and (except for Venus) within 3° of azimuth of being due east and west. If the azimuth is laid out in a mundoscope-like format, we get Mars, Jupiter, Uranus, and Neptune tightly on the east-west axis, with the following aspects:

0°30' Mars-Uranus op.
1°40' Jupiter-Neptune conj.
2°10' Jupiter-Uranus conj.
2°40' Mars-Jupiter op.
3°14' Uranus-Neptune conj.
3°44' Mars-Neptune op.

These aren't bad at all! Some of these aspects would seem quite "off" on their own, but nothing is seriously off in combination. Mars-Uranus is the closest, Jupiter is quite harshly aspected overall. I find it interesting at the very least.

[Jim Eshelman]

Here's an example I can't fail to add to the list. It is almost enough to force an adoption of this approach all by itself (though you all know me better than that <g>). Most of the samples I am finding are already perfectly good charts that either don't need anything else, or are marginally improved by the new aspects. The strongest I've been able to say is that I have yet to find a new aspect by this means that doesn't fit.

Consider, however, the Arisolar for the murder of James A. Garfield: The mundane charts overall describe the event just fine, but, conventionally, the Arisolar is nondescript, with only an angular Mercury (0°17' above Descendant).

However, Mars conjoins Vertex (despite being 8° distant from it in longitude) by being 0°58' north of the Prime Vertical. Even closer, Moon is 0°01' south of the PV, and Uranus 0°41' south. (Moon, especially, doesn't appear in longitude to be anywhere near the Antivertex, and Uranus is 5° off. You can't measure these in longitude, of this I am now sure.)

This produces a Moon-Mars-Uranus triple conjunction within 1°39' where before there was no hint of violence, or even of much activity. Additionally, all three of these planets (Moon, Mars, Uranus) would square the setting Mercury. I have not yet identified a way to calculate exact orbs for PV-to-horizon aspects (which would be best measured along the great circle of the meridian), but the orb will be under 2°.

[Jim Eshelman]

OK, just thinking around.
1) While we don't "need" these contacts to the vertex, they add nuance, at the least. So someday when Mundane Sidereal Astrology forecasts are included in every local news broadcast just like weather reports, these will be handy.

2) When someday comes, instead of using 3 different measurement systems, we just need to get a globe. Mark the MC, ASC, EPT, NP, Vertex, Zenith and so on on the globe, and then we can just mark concentric circles out from the sensitive points, and look at the positions of planets in relation to those concentric circles. We'll call that the Ripple System. Somebody will try to find meaning at the points where the ripples cross other ripples without any evidence of such.
Not an actual globe, like this Faquhar globe from the 70s, but a computerized globe.

[Jim Eshelman]

1) While we don't "need" these contacts to the vertex, they add nuance, at the least. So someday when Mundane Sidereal Astrology forecasts are included in every local news broadcast just like weather reports, these will be handy.

Agreed; or, that is, if I do end up concluding that these are legit (and the momentum seems to be in that direction), then yes, they add more.

In fact, "nuance" seems to capture the tone of what I'm seeing. If I were to make a "working rule" right now, it would be "interpret fully without these, then go back and interpret these." A nuance example: I just did the Canlunar for Pres. Garfield's murder. It already had Saturn square Ascendant and Pluto on IC. Quite a good chart. Only an angular Sun might have made it better, linking it more solidly to the president. (Other charts did that.) But, having seen the tragic - death - loss - no turning back disruption of Saturn-Pluto, we then also have Uranus on Vertex mundanely, and Uranus on the PV squares Pluto on meridian by 0°05'. Whoa! So, what would we add? Well, we'd now call it radical, overthrowing, more disruptive, "bringing down the old," etc., which fits well enough. It doesn't describe the event as well as Saturn-Pluto, but just maybe it tells us what kind of Saturn-Pluto event it was.

Something very interesting that's coming up: We've all been excited by the upcoming Capsolar with Jupiter-Uranus along the meridian. Well... Saturn is only 0°11' off the PV (conjunct Vx). It squares Mars, which is less than 1° from the Southpoint. Saturn on PV (Vx)also squares Jupiter on meridian (IC) mundanely 1°45'. So, it's not just Jupiter-Uranus and some Sun. It's all that plus Saturn, Mars, Mars-Saturn, and Jupiter-Saturn... if what I'm seeing is, in fact, legitimate.

2) When someday comes, instead of using 3 different measurement systems, we just need to get a globe.

That would be sweet. I've had one on loan in the distant past for a few weeks, and they're useful. They're also expensive. A fabulous 3D rotational virtual globe would be even better, and the emerging VR/AR tech that will become more mainstream in the next year will make this even more feasible (and would make it really cool - live inside the globe in 3D and rotate it however you want!). Of course, then we'd be unhappy that it wasn't yet programmed to show all the intersections and flash-up when there's a crossing

[qupote]Somebody will try to find meaning at the points where the ripples cross other ripples without any evidence of such.[/quote]
Of course

[Jim Eshelman]

This is indeed starting to sound more and more interesting. And I am sure that in the future we will have astro programs that do 3D versions of charts and mundoscopes

Arena, it occurs to me (after your questions the other day0, I should give you the hard numbers for your chart for comparison.

Ecliptically, you have Uranus conjunct Vertex (2°41'):
20°36' Virgo Uranus
23°17' Virgo Vertex

This appears to be confirmed by azimuth: Uranus' azimuth is 272°43', or 2°43' from due west. Nothing else falls close to 90° or 270° azimuth.

Using PV amplitude, your Uranus is 2°42' north of the Prime Vertical.

BTW, in high latitudes (like Iceland), these will behave much better, since it is much like planets on horizon near the equator.

Thanks Jim. I am 100% certain that Uranus is one of the biggest influences in my chart - whether it is by Vx contact or WP as in square the MC/IC or what - I just know it has great influence. Those numbers become partile when we consider an alternative birth time of 23.23 as I sometimes do for comparison.

[Jim Eshelman]

I actually have a Farquhar globe of a fairly decent size

Sweet!

Maybe there's a planetarium program we can use as a starting place.

Planetarium programs I've seen are views from the inside. We'd need one that views the celestial sphere from the outside.

[Jim Eshelman]

Well, if we start with a planetarium program, because you can flip them to see the other side of the sky, we should be able to jigger it to display the whole globe at once from the outside. But we should keep the option to view from the inside, because that's how we've seen the sky from ancient times, and because then we can have serious discussions about innies and outties, which I have not had occasion to do for far too long.

[SteveS]

Only if Bernie Sanders is the Dem Nominee, my Nov 3 2020 DSLR will be a good test for the content of Jim's thread here with Vertex mundo sponsored planetary symbolism. My good friend and I are planning on taking a speculative low risk/high reward trade in the NYSE with Bernie becoming the next Prez. Note in Mundo:

DSLR Jupiter is partile Vertex 269,23 AZI
DSLR Pluto 268,00 AZI
DSLR Saturn 267,40 AZI

Jupiter-Pluto symbolism is known by a couple of Siderealist as “great luck” for speculative/gambling ventures. But Saturn is involved in this planetary picture with the Vertex allowing Jim's 3 degree orbs with Vertex hits. Since this DSLR falls on the Day of the Prez election, could Saturn be symbolizing for my speculative objectives the final election results for either the Prez or Senate be delayed? Only TIME knows for sure . My Natal Moon/Jupiter midpoint is partile cnj DSLR IC, the only two natal planets in the foreground of this DSLR .

Nov 3 2020 DSLR:
https://imgur.com/r2lqGsp

[Jim Eshelman]

Interesting example. Although the existence of PVP aspects has been decisively confirmed for ingresses, I haven't had enough examples to check whether they work the same for return charts. I suspect they do, but I haven't had the chance to confirm this.

One important thing to remember: In ingresses, aspects among these planets - plus their PVP squares to other planets exactly on the meridian and horizon - are of great importance, equal to any foreground aspects in the chart. However, the fact that the planets are on the Vertex or Antivertex is not valid.

This is confusing because it is unlike everything we know from planets on the horizon (Asc-Dsc) and meridian (MC-IC): If Mars or Saturn were on an ingress Vertex or Antivertex, that by itself would mean nothing, even though Mars and Saturn are the most-often angular planets for tragic events. Vertex-Antivertex contacts of different planets were random. However, aspects are another matter altogether! All planets exactly due east-west in azimuth are spatially (mundanely) square any planet exactly on MC-IC or Asc-Dsc, and those aspects are quite potent indeed.

For example, the current Caplunar for Washington, DC has Jupiter exactly on IC and Uranus exactly on Vertex. Angular Jupiter is quite potent but there is no angular Uranus - being on the Vertex doesn't imbue angularity. What we do have from Uranus is that it is exactly square Jupiter measured along the horizon (in azimuth).

Were Uranus on Descendant instead, we would have three factors to interpret: angular Jupiter, angular Uranus, and Jupiter square Uranus. Because Uranus is on Vertex instead, we only have two factors to interpret: angular Jupiter and Jupiter square Uranus.


This is important in your example chart. If Jupiter, Saturn, and Pluto were the same distances from, say, Descendant, then we would think them all foreground with Jupiter being closest (0°37') and Saturn and Pluto wider (2°). We'd see the Saturn-Pluto aspect as closest, Jupiter-Pluto and Jupiter-Saturn also there, and then weight our interpretation by the fact that Jupiter is much closer than the others - it would be a Jupiter event.

However, they aren't on Descendant, they're on Vertex, so this last factor isn't there. Jupiter isn't closer t the angle because there is no angle as such. Instead, we have only the three aspects, which, ranked by orb, are:

Saturn-Pluto conj. 0°20'
Jupiter-Pluto conj. 1°23'
Jupiter-Saturn conj. 1°42'

This is more brutal. I'd interpret it as primarily a brutal loss event (Saturn-Pluto), further detailed by Jupiter-Pluto (dramatic impact for good or bad on Jupiter things) and Jupiter-Saturn (usually a loss).

Ihope that your natal Moon and Jupiter prevail. Even more, I hope your October 19 SLR prevails with natal Sun-Uranus-Venus most angular, and a rollicking good time with your friend with transiting Venus-Neptune.

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

Although the existence of PVP aspects has been decisively confirmed for ingresses, I haven't had enough examples to check whether they work the same for return charts. I suspect they do, but I haven't had the chance to confirm this.

I understand Jim. I can't recall ever realizing any Vertex symbolism manifesting important things in my life with Return charts. Although I thought it damn interesting the Vertex is highlighted in my DSLR on election day.

My friend about a week before election is going to risk half his football pool winnings from the last two years on a possible very speculative trade, its a sizable figure relative to my bank account. He is relying on my astrology reads for this possible trade. Our deal: if he profits he shares half his profits with me after taxes. IMO, this trade has great profit potential if Bernie Sanders becomes next Prez, more so, if the Dem's also take Senate. But a-lot of other market & media psychology criteria has to line-up before election day. First thing first: Bernie has to win Dem Nominee.

My friend's birth info:

Jan 8th 1948
10:05 AM CST (AA)
Birmingham, Al
Current Residence Gulf Shores, Al.

The main potential imo for my friend making very fast $ profits is what t. Neptune is doing in his Natal on election day. It also has potential for returning no profits--such is the nature for Neptune speculations. And the Moon-Jupiter hit he has with his SQ charts 3 days after the election, very interesting. If Bernie wins Prez but not Senate, my friend closes-out his trades before market closes on Nov 4th. If Dem Senate goes with Bernie, he closes-out his trade positions before market closes Friday Nov 6th.

The only way this trade will probably be executed: if the market has not completely factored in a Bernie win before election day. In other words the market is totally not expecting a Bernie win, and will be shocked/stunned (totally unexpected) with election results.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Remember we do NOT have a birth time for Bernie. The twelve something one that used to be being touted as A-rated is not.

[SteveS]

JSAD wrote:

Remember we do NOT have a birth time for Bernie. The twelve something one that used to be being touted as A-rated is not.

Thanks JSAD. I am NOT basing any possible speculative trading positions for my friend based on any of the Bernie chart times. I am basing my final possible trade decisions for my friend based mainly on the symbolism in the 2020 Libsolar combined with the 2020 Capsolar and Trump's chart for the 2020 Prez election.

Again, the main criteria for the possible trade decisions for my friend is based on Bernie as the Dem Nominee with him becoming the next Prez. If Bernie wins Prez with a majority of Senate and IF market and media psychology is in place, I am expecting the Daily trading limits to the downside in the S & P 500 to kick-in for the 3 trading days following the election. These daily limits are: "7.0%, 13.0% and 20.0% decline below the Settlement Price of the preceding session". If Bernie wins Prez with Senate and the market opens in an orderly fashion on Nov 4th, my friend will immediately exit his bearish trade positions. If Bernie is not Dem Nominee, my friend and will just make a sports bet (no speculative trades) on whoever the Dem Nominee to win Prez. Basically, I put a lot of faith in the potent angular Uranus/Pluto symbolism for the 2020 Libsolar to manifest big time pertaining to elections 2020 if Bernie is Dem Nominee.

[SteveS]

There is also a plane that divides the celestial sphere into front and back. It runs at right angles to the meridian, east and west directly over our heads and under our feet, and it is called the prime vertical.
Theoretically, the points where this circle crosses the ecliptic ought also to have meaning. So postulated L. Edward Johndro, a technically proficient astrologer from New York, some decades ago. His work led him to conclude that the intersection in the west is more important, and he named that point the Vertex (and the opposite point in the east the Antivertex). He and his students, among them Charles Jayne, have found that the Vertex has to do with fateful and important encounters, either with people or circumstances. I have examined the Vertex and still do not have a clear idea of its usefulness. What does emerge is that it is most active in situations that are dramatic and not characteristic of one's ordinary life. Robert Hand, pg 89, Horoscope Symbols.

All I know for sure with my Nov 3 2020 DSLR (election day), is I have a most active aspected Vertex; and if Bernie is the Dem Nominee, my friend will have executed a week prior to election a most important speculative low risk/high reward trade based on Bernie winning the election. If Bernie is the Dem Nominee, on Nov 3 2020 I will be involved in a very important circumstance with my best friend, and certainly a possible dramatic situation not characteristic of my ordinary life. But, Bernie must have a majority of the Senate go with him as Prez; otherwise, I don't expect much $ from the trade.

[Jim Eshelman]

I just stumbled on a great example of why Vertex contacts need to be taken mundanely.

One of my very favorite places on Earth is Bryce Canyon National Park in Utah. I like all the Utah national parks, but none of them grabs my deep in my soul like Bryce. I wondered if there was anything unique about the coordinates of the place in my locality chart - something close enough to distinguish it from Zion or Arches, for example.

Sure enough, there is something quite unique that spot (37N37, 112W09). However, I might not have seen it if I'd used the Vertex the usual (ecliptical) way. Here is what I would get:

28°55' Sag - Mars
3°20' Can - Uranus
3°37' Can - Jupiter
4°24' Cap - Vx

Natal Jupiter-Uranus is close enough to "count," but not close enough to distinguish this one place from all others nearby. However, look what happens when I list everything in azimuth:

269°02' - Mars
89°53' - Uranus
90'°00' Antivertex / 270° Vertex
90°10' - Jupiter

Jupiter is 0°10' from Av, Uranus 0°07' from Av, and the Ju/Ur midpoint is 0°02' from the axis.

[SteveS]

I have camped near all the National Parks of Utah, so I can relate to one of your favorite places-Bryce Canyon.

[SteveS]

Jim, I have revisited this thread after witnessing a SF Azi vertex related planet (Saturn) with the 2023 Capsolar for a couple of locations. To make sure I understand your thoughts about the new mundane way you discovered with SF to accurately measure planets cnj the Vx/Av: You feel only planets within 3 degree orb of SFs Azi 90 & 270 are possible valid influences, correct?

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim, I have revisited this thread after witnessing a SF Azi vertex related planet (Saturn) with the 2023 Capsolar for a couple of locations. To make sure I understand your thoughts about the new mundane way you discovered with SF to accurately measure planets cnj the Vx/Av: You feel only planets within 3 degree orb of SFs Azi 90 & 270 are possible valid influences, correct?

Your answer has two parts.

First, yes, that's the correct mathematical way to measure it: 90° and 270° azimuth with the effective orb seeming to be 3°.

Second: However, these are completely ineffective in ingresses. (I'd say with return charts, too, though I haven't done the same level of study.) If done two separate studies of Vertex contacts (both ecliptical and mundane) in ingresses against the SMA catalogue of events and they are a complete statistical failure. In fact, where they almost had a measurable statistical result was where they performed the exact opposite, with Venus and Jupiter almost appearing on Vx/Av enough times for terrible, destructive events to be significant. (I think this is simply because it was documenting Venus and Jupiter being away from the angles!).

Therefore... yes, you have understood the correct way of measuring AND don't use this for ingress - it won't work.

I am curious what these locations were. Is it for sports event prediction perhaps?

[SteveS]

Jim asked:

I am curious what these locations were. Is it for sports event prediction perhaps?

Indeed!!! I witness something for the CFP (College Football Playoffs) which not only blew my mind but blew the top off the entire college sporting world heads. Florida State (Tallahassee, FL), a power 5 conference went 13-0 and was left out of the CFP after being ranked in the top 4 for most of the season. Most of the entire community of Tallahassee is feeling straight-up Saturn Big Time. The only mundane chart that I can find with par-excellent symbolism for this huge downer for Tallahassee Fans is their 2023 Capsolar with SF Axi Saturn 90,36. And yes, I realize only one chart but no other better symbolic explanation, IMHO. This cost the University Millions of $ and their fans a heavy dose of Saturn with their clear expectations if going undefeated they would easily make the CFP. I have a couple more examples of mundane Vertex related examples for the CFP which I will post-up later.

[Jim Eshelman]

Tallahassee's Cansolar has Neptune 0°22' from IC, though I agree that the details you gave match Saturn better than Neptune.

But here is where something else comes into play - not exactly the same as "being on the Vertex," but mathematically related to it. I know that you already know about this, and I didn't want to confuse the answer with extraneous details.

But to spell it out more carefully: (1) Two studies showed me that, in the ingresses, planets being on the Vertex were not significant. (2) However, something overwhelmingly strong is that planets on the prime vertical (on Vx or Av mundanely) have valid, important mundane aspects to planets on the meridian and horizon. I call these Prime Vertical Parans (PVP). Just as the horizon and meridian are always square each other in space, and one planet exactly on the meridian is always in exact hard aspect to another planet exactly on the horizon, the same is true with one planet on the PV and another on the horizon or meridian.

The aspect is valid - the geometry is 90° - even though there is no valid "angle" for one of the planets to be on.

So, while I don't regard Saturn on the Capsolar Vertex as being significant... what about Saturn closely square a rising Sun?

Tallahassee's Capsolar was always going to give a hard smack of one type or another since Pluto is 0°43' from EP-a. We then have wider angularities by Moon, Sun, and (very wide) Mercury.

Saturn, it turns out, is in close mundane square to the rising Sun.

Of horizon, meridian, and prime vertical, aspects between any two of the planes is measured in the third. For example, aspects between planets on horizon and meridian are measured on the prime vertical (as in the mundoscope). Aspects between planets on the prime vertical and meridian are measured along the horizon (in azimuth). The hard one - because none of our usual software calculates this - is when one planet is on the horizon and the other on the prime vertical. This has to be measured along the meridian. (I call the measurement meridian longitude, and it took me years to figure out how to calculate it correctly.)

Saturn is 0°39' from the Vx in azimuth. Sun is 7°22' from Ascendant in PV longitude. When we calculate the meridian longitude of each, we get:

0°22' - Saturn
2°26' - Sun

That's a perfectly good aspect!

[SteveS]

I understand Jim, this Sun-Saturn PVP is difficult for me to fully grasp--but I do understand where you are coming from. I will say this: Being a very serious college football sports fan would only allow an me as an astrologer to clearly understand when Fl St lost their great starting QB for the rest of the season next to the last game of the season is why the CFP committee left Fl St out of the playoffs. Defintely part of a fated event (Vx) for the entire college Tallahasee community. I know you don't like the word "fated" but I see so many weird events in sports there is no other word in my didtionary to explain except fated. I will post-up in this thread some more up-coming games with Mundane Vertex symbolism--not for prediction purposes--but for our observation/learning purposes. Thanks Jim for your comments--I always learn from em.

[SteveS]

Jim, I think I have found another mundane Saturn cnj of Axi (89,55) that helps prove your observations to ignore Vertex related symbolism with only one planet in mundane ingresses, (probably using the wrong words—but I think you will understand where I am coming from). In the Tallahassee example you pointed out there was not only a mundane Vertex related Saturn cnj but also to a PV rising Sun aspected to mundane vertex Saturn, correct?

If we look at Lynchburg, VA 2023 Capsolar we see another Axi mundane cnj of Saturn to Av but not to a rising Sun or another meridian or horizon planet; therefore we ignore this singular mundane Saturn cnj Axi 89,55, correct?

Liberty’s football team is 13-0 this season going to their first major bowl in their entire history. Obviously mundane Saturn cnj Av by Axi did not manifest during Liberty’s season, but it definitely did with FL St. Tallahassee because mundane Vertex cnj Saturn was in PV aspect to a rising Sun. Is this what you want me to see/understand?

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim, I think I have found another mundane Saturn cnj of Axi (89,55) that helps prove your observations to ignore Vertex related symbolism with only one planet in mundane ingresses, (probably using the wrong words—but I think you will understand where I am coming from).

Good wording, actually. - The key distinction is that we have a mundane aspect but only one of the planets is on an angle. (The planet on Vertex is not "on an angle.") This takes two planets, of course, since it is the aspect itself that matters.

In the Tallahassee example you pointed out there was not only a mundane Vertex related Saturn cnj but also to a PV rising Sun aspected to mundane vertex Saturn, correct?

The Sun-Saturn aspect is the thing that matters. The Saturn on Vx only alerts us to look for a possible aspect.

If we look at Lynchburg, VA 2023 Capsolar we see another Azi mundane cnj of Saturn to Av but not to a rising Sun or another meridian or horizon planet; therefore we ignore this singular mundane Saturn cnj Axi 89,55, correct?

That's the idea, yes. Double checking: Yes, it's a dormant ingress, so there is nothing to read; and an "angular Saturn" type of effect would not have described the year.

Liberty’s football team is 13-0 this season going to their first major bowl in their entire history. Obviously mundane Saturn cnj Av by Axi did not manifest during Liberty’s season, but it definitely did with FL St. Tallahassee because mundane Vertex cnj Saturn was in PV aspect to a rising Sun. Is this what you want me to see/understand?

Yes.

BTW, Liberty was going to have an outstanding year, either positive or negative, since the Cansolar has Pluto 0°35' from Ascendant. Moon and Uranus are square in the more distant foreground, so it would be exciting and startling, right?

We do need to find a way to make these aspects more visible to more people.

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

We do need to find a way to make these aspects more visible to more people.

We most certainly do! I think you have discovered a most important astrological detail (aspect) which has been hidden to astrologers forever--till now.

[SteveS]

Jim, if I understand your observations/thoughts with this thread, Tuscaloosa’s 2023 Capsolar has an angular Moon-Saturn 90 aspect influence with mundo Moon 00,10 on MC and Azi Saturn 87,12, correct?
And, Ann Arbor, MI 2023 Capsolar has an angular Mercury-Venus 90 aspect with mundo Mercury 02,29 on ASC and Azi Venus 92,37, correct? If so, does this mundo Mercury-Venus 90 calculate a partile 90? Thanks

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim, if I understand your observations/thoughts with this thread, Tuscaloosa’s 2023 Capsolar has an angular Moon-Saturn 90 aspect influence with mundo Moon 00,10 on MC and Azi Saturn 87,12, correct?

The Capsolar I'm using (calculated by TMSA) is for 6:04:09 AM CST. We may be using slightly different calculations (if you used Solar Fire to get the time), but I wanted to make sure we're comparing the same chart.

In Tuscaloosa, this Capsolar has Moon 0°03' from MC in the mundoscope (prime vertical longitude) and Saturn 2°44' from the Antivertex in azimuth (87°16'). This alerts us that there may be an aspect between them. However, we have to get them in the same framework. For meridian-to-PV aspects, that framework is the horizon (azimuth), so we can still use Saturn's azimuth but need to compare it to Moon's azimuth:

179°57' - Moon's azimuth
87°16' - Saturn's azimuth
These are 92°41' apart (think of them as 29°57' and 27°16', respectively, or just subtract the azimuth numbers). This 2°41' square is close enough in my book so, yes, there is a Moon-Saturn PVP.

And, Ann Arbor, MI 2023 Capsolar has an angular Mercury-Venus 90 aspect with mundo Mercury 02,29 on ASC and Azi Venus 92,37, correct? If so, does this mundo Mercury-Venus 90 calculate a partile 90?

This one is trickier. If one is on the Vx axis and one on horizon, you can't calculate it from anything you have available. (It's the calculation I spent years figuring out how to do.) Horizon-to-PV aspects are measured along the meridian (in meridian longitude).

Besides other angularities, like Pluto on EP-a and Moon several degrees off MC, Ann Arbor has Mercury has Mercury 2°32' past Ascendant in PV longitude. Venus azimuth 92°41' is also 2°41' past Antivertex, but in azimuth. This looks like an aspect, so we should test. by calculating the meridian longitude of Mercury and Venus. (I have a spreadsheet that does this.) Where 0°/30° is the angle, we get:

28°54' - Mercury ML
-------------------------- 0°/30° is the angle
1°11' - Venus ML

So they are 2°17' from exact square.

[SteveS]

Thanks Jim, this helps me understand more.

[SteveS]

The Moon-Saturn 2023 Capsolar PV 90 aspect for Tuscaloosa, Al will be a good test for this thread, IMHO. Only one chart, but if Bama wins vs Michigan’s 2023 Capsolar PV Mercury-Venus aspect on Jan 1 2024, I will be somewhat surprised with how certain test Ingresses have performed with Jim’s PV test aspects in this thread. Psychologically Bama fans expect winning championships and Michigan fans don’t expect winning championships. If Bama loses this game—it will be huge Moon-Saturn downer adding confirmation these PV Ingress aspects may be important to add to our Ingress toolbox.

[SteveS]

IMHO, NYSE 1907 SSR with Mars Azi 89,44; Uranus Azi 92,20; Neptune Azi 272,22 square Sun on DSC was the symbolism for the financial panic of 1907. Transiting Saturn partile conjunct NYSE MC.

[SteveS]

Jim, is my DEC 11 SLR (Springville) a PV Sun-Saturn-Neptune aspect?

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim, is my DEC 11 SLR (Springville) a PV Sun-Saturn-Neptune aspect?

At a first glance, we see transiting Sun 1°58' past IC and transiting Neptune 3°01' before Descendant. (These are in prime vertical longitude.) This isn't a close paran - the orb is 4° (and the ecliptical aspect is about 5°). Saturn is almost 2° before Vertex, so we suspect there is a Saturn-Neptune close aspect but not a Sun-Saturn.

We can confirm the Sun-Saturn condition quickly by checking azimuth: Saturn is 268°05' (1°55' before 270°) and Sun is 5°08' (5°08' after 0° or IC), so their orb would be 7°03', much too wide.

There still might be a Saturn -Neptune, though. Checking their meridian longitude with my spreadsheet:

29°42' - Neptune
0°41' - Saturn

Yes, Saturn just before the prime vertical (Vx) and Neptune just before the horizon (Dsc) are 0°59' from exact square as measured along the meridian.

Sun square Saturn (along the horizon) is 7°03', which I think we both agree is too wide to consider, and Sun square Neptune (along the prime vertical) is 3°59' (perhaps perceivable but not very strong in a lunar); but Saturn square Neptune (along the meridian) is 0°59'.

Caveat: I haven't yet been able to confirm that these work (that we can rely on them) in lunars. In theory, they should work in lunars if they work in ingresses, I can't say I have enough evidence from the few I've seen. Your feedback on this particular lunar, then, is valuable.

[Jim Eshelman]

Natal Saturn is also involved. This is where understanding the mundane placement on Vx is so important. You'd never guess its involvement in longitude:

24°03' Can - r Saturn
5°47' Aqu - SLR Vertex
6°40' Aqu - t Saturn

But in azimuth, it's easy to see:

268°05' - t Saturn
90°/270° - Vx/Av axis
91°45' - r Saturn

It's a little wide - 3°40' - but not horribly wide. Natal Saturn (azimuth 91°45' or 1°45' past Av) also has a 3°23' square to transiting Sun (azimuth 5°08', or 5°08' past IC). These are minor but maybe valid. - But the real shocker (I had to calculate to see it, and would have guessed it wasn't there) is in the meridian longitudes of transiting Neptune to natal Saturn!

28°54' - r Saturn ML
29°42' - t Neptune ML

Transiting Neptune (on the horizon) is only 0°48' from square natal Saturn (on the prime vertical). So there are close Neptune aspects to both Saturns.

IF, that is, these are valid aspects in a lunar.

[SteveS]

For sure this SLR timed Saturn big time, but it could be my t Saturn on my r IC as well. Saturn has me mostly confined & suffering with back pain and neck pain, last 2 weeks been in PT. I see the Moon-Mars in my Dec 11 SLR for the pain, and am thinking the PV Saturn-Neptune aspect is for the suffering principle of being mostly confined to bed with not much freedom of motion without pain. So, I see with this SLR an angular Sun-Neptune combo and a hidden PV Saturn-Neptune aspect; plus SLR Mars cnj my r Moon for this physical mess I am in, probably want be able to be with family for Christmas.

I though any planet on the Meridian or Horizon axis ( my SLR Sun) with a planet within 3 degrees of Azi Vx/Av axis ( my SLR Saturn) was a hidden angular 90 degree aspect? Is a PV 90 aspect only with a planet either only on the MC or ASC within 3 degrees Azi Vx/Av a hidden angular 90 aspect, which would mean since my SLR Sun is on the IC it would not be a hidden 90 to my SLR Saturn?

[Jim Eshelman]

I'm really sorry to hear this has been such a miserable, painful time. I'm sure Saturn's slow transit across your IC has been a big player. Normally transits to non-luminary progressions aren't a big deal, but progressed Mars is currently 7°31' Leo as well - barely out of the 1° of your MC - and Saturn has been transiting opposite this along your meridian. (From a medical astrology basis, Saturn opposite Mars along Aquarius and Leo would be expected to affected either your heart or your back, and it seems the back caught the worst of it this time, which I suppose is the better outcome).

I though any planet on the Meridian or Horizon axis (my SLR Sun) with a planet within 3 degrees of Azi Vx/Av axis ( my SLR Saturn) was a hidden angular 90 degree aspect?

It's the potential for one, but you actually have to calculate it. (It's the same as if you are estimating angularities in zodiacal longitude but actually need to check the mundoscope to be sure.) Vx-Av to MC-IC aspects are measured in azimuth (along the horizon), and in this case the Sun-Saturn orb is quite wide.

It's important to keep in mind that the three rings of horizon, meridian, and prime vertical are interlocked in fixed relationship: Each ring is at a right angle (90°) to BOTH of the others. This gives the general mathematical rule: Aspects between any two of these circles will be measured in the THIRD circle. For example, to see a mundane aspect between a planet on MC (meridian) and one on Ascendant (horizon), we use the mundoscope - that is, we look along the third circle, the prime vertical. Similarly, to see an aspect between a planet on the MC (meridian) and one on the Vertex (prime vertical), we look along the horizon (in azimuth). Finally, to see an aspect between a planet on Ascendant (horizon) and on the on Vertex (PV), we look along the third circle, the meridian (in what I've named meridian longitude).

Looking for planets within 3° of azimuth 90°/270° is the start of finding these aspects - such as identifying your natal and transiting Saturns in the current SLR. But we then have to calculate exactly to be sure. Of course, the best solution is to have our astrological software calculate it for us - but we're not there yet.

Is a PV 90 aspect only with a planet either only on the MC or ASC within 3 degrees Azi Vx/Av a hidden angular 90 aspect, which would mean since my SLR Sun is on the IC it would not be a hidden 90 to my SLR Saturn?

No. It alerts us to look, though: That aspect (IC to Vx) would be measured along the horizon (in azimuth) and, by azimuth, the orb is too wide:

268°05' - t Saturn (1°55' before Vx
0°/ 90° / 180° / 270° - angles
5°08' - t Sun (5°08' after IC)

Their orb is 7°03'.

[SteveS]

Thanks Jim, I will continue to study with more examples to come. As soon as I think I got it---I don’t---it’s kinda complicated for me.

[SteveS]

Jim, using Bowser’s 12:12 PM LAT for USA Chart, is there a hidden PV Mars-Saturn-Uranus for this chart’s 1963 DC SSR?

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim, using Bowser’s 12:12 PM LAT for USA Chart, is there a hidden PV Mars-Saturn-Uranus for this chart’s 1963 DC SSR?

I have the U.S. chart calculated for just over one minute earlier (12:10:43 PM LAT). The SSR for that time (using Solar Fire) has transiting Mars 0°16' past Ascendant. (TMSA gives it more accurately as 25' above.) At first impression, it looks like there probably are aspects: Mars is 0°25' past Ascendant (PVL), Uranus is 1°29' before Antivertex (azimuth) and Saturn is 1°21' past Vertex (azimuth). I'd guess there is a Mars-Saturn that is quite close and maybe Uranus in the mix: Let's calculate meridian longitudes to find out:

29°30' - t Saturn
--------------------
0°03' - t Mars
0°26' - t Uranus

Yes, they are all quite close. But there's more! USA natal Moon is at azimuth 269°24'. PV-to-PV aspects would be taken in azimuth, so already we have:

269°24' - r Moon (azimuth)
270°00' - Vertex
271°21' - t Saturn (azimuth)

So transiting Saturn conjoined natal Moon within 1°57' exactly due west (Vertex). Furthermore, natal Moon's meridian longitude is 0°15' - place that in the ML list above and see that it is 0°12' from conjunct transiting Mars and 0°11' from conjunct transiting Uranus, precisely at their midpoint.

Ken's preferred time for a minute or so later would produce similar results.