Testing Quotidian Variations

Q&A and discussion on Quotidian variations of progressions.
Post Reply
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Testing Quotidian Variations

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Garth Allen 1971 Jan 4 wrote:The term "fictitious time" is itself fictitious if you confuse revolutions with rotations! Even Cyril in his dotage couldn't separate the two logically, though of course he knew better in his brighter years. GET THIS STRAIGHT: What is called fictitious time in astronomy RUNS AT THE SAME PACE AS SIDEREAL TIME -- and by pace I MEAN LINEARLY. The Earth turns, for all practical purposes within one part in millionths, EXACTLY AT THE SAME RATE WHETHER IT IS AT APHELION OR PERIHELION. THE SIDEREAL ROTATION OF THE EARTH IS UNIFORM, AND IT IS SURELY THE SIDEREAL (THAT IS, CELESTIAL) SPHERE WHICH IS THE TRUE FRAME OF REFERENCE.

It is pitiably simple to establish whether the Q charts should be rotated sidereally or in terms of the solar anomaly. Study just a few cases (a lot aren't necessary) of events occurring in October-November for February-born people, and you have a big surprise coming. Reverse the process, studying progressed charts by both methods for autumn-born people with the events in February. The flow of time is uniform in astrology as well as in physics.
Garth Allen wrote me this in January 1971. It refers to the question of whether natal and SSR quotidians should be progressed at a linear (RAMS) rate or varying (RAAS) rate. Decades ago I spot-checked what he said but have never tabulated a serious cross-comparison where others can view it.

Search for equation of time online (Wikipedia will do) and you'll get helpful graphs showing that Sun's actual pace lags most behind its mean position in February and races most ahead in late October and early November every year. That means that we can get the best examples of which rate works better by comparing Oct-Nov events for February-born people and February events for Oct-Nov-born people.

I will use this thread primarily to identify major events with reliable birth data and this kind of February vs. October-November timing, then compare the SNQ to the Neo-SNQ, and the SQ to the Neo-SQ. (Neo- was Fagan's end-of-life nomenclature for quotidians calculated at the apparent solar rate rather than mean rate.)

While I'm at it, with the charts in front of me and transits calculated for the events, I might as well take the time to compare the SNQ1 vs. SNQ2. Bradley wrote me about this a couple of times:
Garth Allen 1971 Jan 4 wrote:Also, any statistical tabulation of "scores" for testing which is valid, Q1 or Q2, the Q2 column always shows a three-to-one total in its favor.
Garth Allen 1971 Jan 14 wrote:Just got your letter and am spurred to make a quickie reply. Maybe I didn't make it clear that I totally reject the SNQ [Q1], having done more than one objective statistical test (with accurately recorded birth and event times) to see which is the valid one, the Q1 or the Q2. The SNQ is the Q1.

Whenever you take a batch of data, tallying an X under Q1 or Q2 whenever one or the other shows clearer and more apt contacts, the Q2 column will always have about three times more Xs than the Q1 column. (Notice that Cyril was making more of the Q2 also as time passed.) (I have a 21-year accumulation of Cyril's charts, correspondence, etc., and time after time they'll bear the notation, "The Q2 is more lucid for this case," or some remark to that effect.) I simply reject the SNQ according to the evidence.
My tests over the years confirmed this rough three-to-one preference of Q2 over Q1. The method is to look at the two side-by-side for the same event and - relying on progressed Moon aspects and close angular contacts - judge which is better. About three-fourths of the time you'll probably end up choosing the Q2.

I've started a blank post for each event to be studied, and now will work my way through them (it will be a slow, tedious, and regrettably error-prone job) and fill in the blanks.

Here are the events I will check (a work in progress) - I'm using some examples just outside the ideal weeks of the year to increase the number of examples:
  • Edward White (1930 Nov 14) - died in Apollo 1 fire 1967 Jan 27
  • James Dean (1931 Feb 8) - died in car crash 1955 Sep 30
  • Janis Joplin (1943 Jan 19) - died from overdose 1970 Oct 4
  • Karen Silkwood (1946 Feb 19) - died in car crash 1975 Nov 13
  • Larry Flynt (1942 Nov 1) - shot and crippled 1978 Mar 6
  • Sylvia Plath (1932 Oct 27) - suicide 1963 Feb 11
Here are the scores of the comparisons. I will update this all through the project so there is a running score:

SNQ: 4
Neo-SNQ: 1

SQ: 5
Neo-SQ: 1

SNQ2: 3
SNQ1: 2
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Edward White death in Apollo 1 fire

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: November 14, 1930, 6:20 AM CST, Fort Sam Houston, TX
Died (fire): January 27, 1967, 6:31 PM EST, Cape Canaveral, FL

SNQ vs. Neo-SNQ
SNQ: t Sa EP-a (8') or EP (48'), t Ur Dsc (57')
Neo-SNQ (nothing)
Winner: SNQ

SQ vs. Neo-SQ
SQ: r Mars IC (19'), s Me Dsc (59'), t Ve Z (29') p Mo sq s Ur (14') t Ur (19'), p Mo sq s Sa (19')
Neo-SQ r Ve Dsc (21'), r Su-Ve WP-a, r Mo N (31'), p Moon sq s Sa (3'), s Ur (30')
Winner: SQ (for many reasons but especially Mars tips it)

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (see above) +2
SNQ1: t Ne MC (47'), s Ve MC (15'), t Ne co s Ve, t Su Asc (51') +1
Winner: Q2
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

James Dean death in auto accident

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: Feb 8, 1931, 9:00 AM CST, Marion, IN
Died: Sep 30, 1955, 5:45 AM PST, Cholame, CA

SNQ vs. Neo-SNQ
SNQ: (nothing)
Neo-SNQ (nothing)
Winner: Neither has anything. Tie.

SQ vs. Neo-SQ
SQ: SQ Mo MC (29'), r Ne Z (1')
Neo-SQ (nothing)
Winner: SQ

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (see above) 0
SNQ1: p Sa IC (37'), r Sa N (49'), r/p Pl Z (24', 8') +2
Winner: Q1 is unequivocally better
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Janis Joplin death by drug overdose

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: Jan 19, 1943, 9:45 AM CWT, Port Arthur, TX
Died: Oct 4, 1970, 1:40 AM PDT, Hollywood, CA

SNQ vs. Neo-SNQ
SNQ: r Ve on N (17'), t Ve EP 9' [t Sa near WP]
Neo-SNQ r Ve IC (11'), t Ju Asc (20'), r Me N (47')
Winner: Venus is appropriate it not-ideal, given her activities of the evening, but Jupiter is all wrong. Tipped to SNQ.

SQ vs. Neo-SQ
SQ: t Pl Asc (2'), s Pl EP (17'), s Ma WP-a (32'), p Ma-Pl op (43')
Neo-SQ t Mars EP-a (34')
Winner: SQ wins easily

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (see above) +1
SNQ1: (nothing) 0
Winner: Q2 by default
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Karen Silkwood death in car crash

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: Feb 19, 1946, 9:50 PM CST, Longview, TX
Died: Nov 13, 1974, 6:00 PM CST, 35N5'19" 97W35'06"

SNQ vs. Neo-SNQ
SNQ: [t Mars 2°+ from IC] t Mo-Su on Nadir
Neo-SNQ p Moon IC (44')
Winner: The SNQ contact is an exact New Moon on the angle. That's a more significant crossing.

SQ vs. Neo-SQ
SQ: (nothing)
Neo-SQ r Mercury WP-a (8'), t Jupiter WP-a (43'), t Ju co r Me (35')
Winner: The Neo-SQ is as wrong as can be, so the SQ - saying nothing - wins by default.

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (see above) +1
SNQ1: r Mars EP (45'), p Jupiter N (59'), r Jupiter N (60'), N = Ju/Ju (0') -1
Winner: Q1 is mixed but mostly bad, so the Q2 wins (exact New Moon on angle).
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Larry Flynt shot and disabled

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: Nov 1, 1942, 9:10 PM EWT, Salyersville, KY
Died: Mar 6, 1978, 12:00 PM, Lawrenceville, GA

SNQ vs. Neo-SNQ
SNQ: r Su EP (29'), r Ve Asc (15') [r/p Pluto near MC]
Neo-SNQ t Ur EP (15')
Winner: Neo-SNQ: Transiting Uranus fits better than natal Venus.

SQ vs. Neo-SQ
SQ: [t Ve-Ju near angles, but not on], p Mo sq s Ve (1')
Neo-SQ [t Ju near MV but not on] p Mo sq s Ve (12')
Winner: Both are inappropriate. If I have to choose, the inappropriate aspect with the larger orb has to win, meaning the Neo-SQ. I'll give it half a point.

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (see above) -1
SNQ1: p Mo op r Ur (5') +2
Winner: Q1 wins for the clear, close Moon-Uranus (better than natal Venus)

NOTE: This entire event is wacko. I stopped to read about the assassination attempt to see if there was something truly Venus about it, but there wasn't.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Sylvia Plath suicide

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: Oct 27, 1932, 2:10 PM EST, Boston, MA
Died: Feb 11, 1963, 6:00 AM, London, UK

SNQ vs. Neo-SNQ
SNQ: r Moon EP-a (30'); p Mo co r Me (19'), sq r Ma (5'), sq t Su (13')
Neo-SNQ p Moon co r Me (7'), sq r Ma (13'), sq t Su 5')
Winner: Close call, but p Moon's contact to natal Mars (5') in the SNQ seems more exactly right symbolism. Q angles are 7° apart.

SQ vs. Neo-SQ
SQ: t Sa MC 23' [near Ne, Ma], p Mo sq s Ma (52')
Neo-SQ t Su MC (1'), r Mars IC (7'), r Me WP (5'), s Ve WP-a 31', t Su op r Ma (8'), p Mo sq s Ma (37')
Winner: Very close - each gives different symbolism that might fit. Either one could claim to be best by different criteria, but I think adding solar Venus on an angle in the Neo-SQ disqualifies it. Transiting Saturn on SQ MC gets the nod (but barely).

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (see above) +2
SNQ1: p Ma EP-a (23'), r Ne EP (25'), [p Moon not in orb of any of the aspects] +2
Winner: I have to call this a tie. The angularities of the Q1 are quite fitting although the Q2 Moon aspects do seem to be what really matters.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Testing Quotidian Variations

Post by Jim Eshelman »

This first set is done. I didn't have many on file that fit the Feb vs. Oct-Nov criteria and the numbers are quite small. Nonetheless, the results were essentially what we predicted. (That Larry Flynt example is weird.)
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

More on Q1 vs. Q2

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Although the mean vs. apparent question was answered pretty well with even that small set of charts (Bradley said it wouldn't take more than a few for a clear pattern), the Q2 vs. Q1 rate issue was left ambiguous. I plan now to add the longer list of test charts to see if this documents a clear answer. (I'm doing all the work here in front of everybody, rather than do it first and report later. You see what I see.)

Here are the events I will check (a work in progress):
  • Abigail Folger (murder)
  • Abraham Lincoln (assassination)
  • Adolf Hitler (suicide)
  • Aleister Crowley (received life-defining channeled text)
  • Anne Heche (death in fiery car explosion)
  • Beatrice Cenci (execution by beheading)
  • Benito Mussolini (mob murder)
  • Big Bopper (death in plane crash)
  • Buddy Holly (death in plane crash)
  • Carl Erskine (pitched first televised no-hitter)
  • Cass Elliot (death)
  • Charles, Prince of Wales (wedding)
  • Charles Whitman (Austin tower murders)
  • Christa McAuliffe (death by explosion)
  • Crown Prince Rudolph (murder-suicide)
  • Diana, Princess of Wales (wedding)
  • Diana, Princess of Wales (death in car crash)
  • Diane Arbus (suicide)
  • Donald Bradley (apartment robbed)
  • Donald Bradley (death)
  • King Edward VIII (abdication)
  • Edward White (death in Apollo 1 fire)
  • Elvis Presley (death)
  • Ernest Hemingway (suicide)
  • Franklin D. Roosevelt (death)
  • Freddie Prinze (suicide)
  • George Lincoln Rockwell (murder)
  • George Moscone (murder)
  • George Smith (miracle survival)
  • George Wallace (shot and disabled)
  • Gianni Versace (murder)
  • Gloria Estefan (injury in vehicle accident)
  • Harvey Milk (murder)
  • Indira Gandhi (assassination)
  • Jack Parsons (death in explosion)
  • James A. Eshelman (received life-redirecting communication)
  • James A. Garfield (fatally shot)
  • James A. Garfield (died from shooting)
  • James Forrestal (suicide)
  • Jim Jones (Jonestown massacre)
  • Jimi Hendrix (death by drug overdose)
  • Joan of Arc (execution by burning)
  • John Belushi (death by drug overdose)
  • John Denver (death by plane crash)
  • John Glenn (Friendship 7 launch)
  • John F. Kennedy, Jr. (death by plane crash)
  • John F. Kennedy (assassination)
  • John Lennon (murder)
  • Kurt Cobain (suicide)
  • Lee Harvey Oswald (JFK assassination)
  • Lee Harvey Oswald (murder)
  • Lenny Bruce (death by drug overdose)
  • King Louis XVI (execution by beheading)
  • King Ludwig II (death by murder, suicide, or accident)
  • Malcolm X (assassination)
  • Margaret Edens (death by train collision)
  • Marie Antoinette (execution by beheading)
  • Marilyn Monroe (death by drug overdose)
  • Marion DeSio (triple ankle fracture accident)
  • Martin Luther King, Jr. (assassination)
  • Mata Hari (execution by firing squad)
  • Matthew Quellas (life-altering accident)
  • Michael Jackson (death by drug overdose)
  • Mohandas Gandhi (assassination)
  • Natalie Wood (death by accident)
  • Nicole Brown Simpson (murder)
  • Patsy Cline (death by plane crash)
  • Prince (death by drug overdose)
  • Ralph Edwards (lost home to fire()
  • Richard M. Nixon (resignation)
  • Richard Speck (Chicago murders)
  • Richie Valens (death by plane crash)
  • Ricky Nelson (death by plane crash)
  • Robert F. Kennedy (assassination)
  • Robin Williams (suicide)
  • Roger Chaffee (death by Apollo 1 fire)
  • Sharon Tate (murdered)
  • Sonny Bono (death by ski accident)
  • Vincent Van Gogh (death by gunshot accident or suicide)
  • Virgil "Gus" Grissom (death by Apollo 1 fire)
  • Virginia Woolf (suicide)
  • Warren G. Harding (death)
  • Whitney Houston (death by drowning)
  • William McKinley (assassination)
  • Unnamed male (electrocuted by lightning strike)
Here are the scores of the comparisons. I will start with the five examples already worked, then updated these numbers as I go so there is a running score:

SNQ2: 55
SNQ1: 28
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Abigail Folger - murdered

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: Aug 11, 1943, 5:27 PM PWT, San Francisco, CA
Event: Aug 9, 1969, 0:340 AM PDT, 34N05'38" 118W25'57"

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Ma IC (58'); t Ma co p Mo (40'), p Mo-Ma op (22') +3
SNQ1: p Me Z (26') 0
Winner: Q2 easily!
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Sharon Tate - murdered

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: Jan 24, 1943, 5:47 PM CWT, Dallas, TX
Event: Aug 9, 1969, 0:340 AM PDT, 34N05'38" 118W25'57"

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Me co p Mo (27') 0 at least
SNQ1: t Ur MC (36'), p Ne MC (55'), t Ur co p Ne (19'), t Me co p Mo (27') +1 at least
Winner: Q1
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Nicole Brown Simpson - murdered

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: May 19, 1959, 2:00 AM CET, Frankfurt am Main
Event: June 12, 1994, 10:20 PM, Brentwood, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (nothing) 0
SNQ1: t Pl Asc (29') +2
Winner: Q1
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Crown Prince Rudolph - murder-suicide

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: Aug 21, 1858, 10:15 PM LMT, Laxenburg, Austria
Event: Jan 31, 1889, 0:00 AM, Mayerling, Austria

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Su IC (30') 0
SNQ1: r Ve Asc (50'), p Mo sq r Ma (38') +2
Winner: Q1
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

George Lincoln Rockwell - murder

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: Mar 9, 1918, 3:00 AM CST, Bloomington, IN
Event: Aug 25, 1967, 12:00 PM, Arlington, VA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Ur Asc (51'), r Su WP-a (59') +2
SNQ1: t Ne co p Mo (55') +1
Winner: Close... but Q2 is the more distinctive and descriptive
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

John Lennon - murdered

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: Oct 9, 1940, 6:30 PM BST, Liverpool, England
Event: Dec 8, 1980, 10:50 PM EST, New York, NY

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Mo MC (47'), r/p Pl (21', 28'), r Ur Asc (29'), p Su Dsc (23'), t Ur Dsc (34'), p Su op r Ur (52'), t Ur co p Su (11') +2
SNQ1: r/p Ne WP (23', 53'), t Sa sq p Mo (40') +2
Winner: Very close call, but it is the Q2 that shows everything building to that peak moment.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Gianni Versace - murdered

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: Dec 2, 1946, 6:00 am CET, Reggio di Calabria, Italy
Event: Jul 15, 1997, 9:12 am EDT, Miami Beach, FL

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Mo WP-a (26'), p Ve IC (34') [if even-hour birth time is a little early, r Ma-Ur exactly angular] -1
SNQ1: t Sa EP-a (20'), p Mo Z (27') +2
Winner: Q1
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

George Moscone & Harvey Milk - murdered

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: Nov 24, 1929, 4:00 am PST, San Francisco, CA
Event: Nov 27, 1978, 11:15 am PST, San Francisco, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: p Ju Dsc (32'), t Me EP (54'), t Ma op p Mo (48'), t Ne op p Mo (27') +2
SNQ1: t Mo EP (19') 0
Winner: Q2


Born: May 22, 1930, 1:30 am EDT, Woodmere, NY
Event: Nov 27, 1978, 11:15 am PST, San Francisco, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Ne N (17'), t Ma N (58'), r Mo Dsc (21'), t Sa EP-a (20') +3
SNQ1: t Ju Asc (15'), p Mo-Ju op (8') -1
Winner: Decisively Q2
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Abraham Lincoln & John F. Kennedy - assassinations

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: Feb 12, 1809, 6:54 am LMT, Hodgenville, KY
Event: Apr 14, 1865, 10:13 PM LMT, Washington, DC

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Mo Ds (17') [r Ma N 1°13'] (small difference in birth time would make significant difference) 0
SNQ1: t Pl EP (42') (small diff in birth time would make significant difference) +2
Winner: Q1


Born: May 29, 1917, 3:00 pm EST, Brookline, MA
Event: Nov 22, 1963, 12:30 pm CST, Dallas, TX

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Ur sq p Mo (13') +2
SNQ1: t Ve Z (30'), t Ma Z (25'), p Ma N (53'), p Mo co r Su (31') +2
Winner: Q1
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Lee Harvey Oswald - JFK shooting & own death

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: Oct 18, 1939, 9:55 PM CST, New Orleans, LA
Event (JFK shooting): Nov 22, 1963, 12:30 PM CST, Dallas, TX

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: p Ur MC (-49'), p Sun IC (+14') [other fitting planets close] +2
SNQ1: r Sun IC (25'), r/p Pluto Asc (32', 35'); t Su co p Mo (33') +2
Winner: Though both are good, Q1 is better.


Event (Oswald murder): Nov 24, 1963, 1:07 PM, Dallas, TX

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Ur MC (12'), p Ma Dsc (17'), t Su co p Mo (31') +2
SNQ1: t Sa (22') +2
Winner: Though both are good, Q2 is better.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Gandhi, MLK, Malcolm X, RFK, Indira Gandhi

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Martin Luther King, Jr. born: Jan 15, 1929, 12:00 PM CST, Atlanta, GA
Event (murdered): Apr 4, 1968, 6:01 PM CST, Memphis, TN

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (nothing) [planets close to angles, not exact] 0
SNQ1: t Su MC (52'), r Su Dsc (1°13'), p Mo-Su op (54') +1
Winner: Q1 (mostly by default)


Mohandas Gandhi born: Oct 2, 1869, 7:08:11 am, Porbandar, India
Event (murdered): Jan 30, 1948, 5:12 PM IST, New Delhi, India

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Sa IC (54'), r Ma WP (22'), r Pl EP (23'), t Sa sq r Ma (32'), t Ma N (1°22'), r Ma-Pl op (45') +3
SNQ1: t Ma WP (48'), p Mo-Me op (27') +2
Winner: Easily Q2


Malcolm X born: May 19, 1925, 10:25 PM, Omaha, NE
Event (murdered): Feb 21, 1965, 3:30 PM EST, New York, NY

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Ur Z (53') +1
SNQ1: r/p Ne MC (57', 10'), t Ve IC (44'), t Ve op r/p Ne (13', 34') +1
Winner: Q2


Robert F. Kennedy born: Nov 20, 1925, 3:11 PM EST, Brookline, MA
Event (murdered): Jun 5, 1968, 12:15 am PDT, Los Angeles, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Mo IC (20') 0
SNQ1: t Ma MC (4'), p Me IC (1'), t Pl Asc (3'), r Me N (12'), t Ma op p Me (3'), t Ma-Pl sq (58'), t Pl sq r Me (15') +3
Winner: Overwhelmingly Q1


Indira Gandhi born: Nov 19, 1917, 11:11:14 PM IST, Allahabad, India
Event (murdered): Oct 31, 1984, 9:29 am IST, New Delhi, India

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Ne IC (9'), t Ma op p Mo (56') +3
SNQ1: t Pl N (54') +2
Winner: Q2
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

William McKinley & James Garfield murders

Post by Jim Eshelman »

William McKinley born: Jan 29, 1843, 11:32 pm LMT, Niles, OH
Event (shot): Sep 5, 1901, 4"07 pm EST, Buffalo, NY

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Su WP (25'), r Ne Dsc (24'), r Ma N (38'), p Ju (7'), p Ju co r Ne (17'), p Ju sq r Ma (31'), r Ma-Ne sq (14'), p Mo co r Ur (10') +2 (could be 3)
SNQ1: t Ju Dsc (33') -2
Winner: Easily Q2


William McKinley born: Jan 29, 1843, 11:32 pm LMT, Niles, OH
Event (died): Sep 14, 1901, 2:15 am EST, Buffalo, NY

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Ma IC (41'), r Ne (55'), r Ma-Ne sq (14'), p Mo co r Ur (6') +2 (could be 3)
SNQ1: p Me MC (2'), p Me WP (25'), p Me-Ma sq (27'), t Sa Dsc (14'), p Su Z (53'), t Sa sq p Su (39') +2 (could be 3)
Winner: Both are really good! (One might like to have both as examples.) But the Q1 is clearly extraordinary in this case.


James A. Garfield born: Nov 19, 1831, 2:00 am LMT, Orange, OH
Event (shot): Jul 2, 1881, 8:30 am LMT, Washington, DC

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Ur op p Mo (10') +2
SNQ1: p Ur MC (57'), t Ju EP-a (43') -1
Winner: Q2


James A. Garfield born: Nov 19, 1831, 2:00 am LMT, Orange, OH
Event (died): Sep 19, 1881, 10:35 am LMT, Elberon, NJ

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Ma MC 1°19', t Sun Asc (8'), t Su-Ma sq (52'), p Mo-Ma sq (15') +3
SNQ1: r Ma IC (8') +2
Winner: Q2
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Adolf Hitler - suicide (or general defeat)

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Born: Apr 20, 1889, 6:30 PM LT, Braunau am Inn, Austria
Event: Apr 30, 1945, 3:30 pm CEDT, Berlin, Germany

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Ur Dsc (22'); p Mo s r Me (7') +1
SNQ1: r Sa MC (47'), p Ve WP (47'), r Ve WP-a (57'), r Su Dsc (31') 0
Winner: Not an easy call (the Q1 has strong factors of opposing types). Forced to pick the Q2 as better (due to two Venuses disqualifying the Q1).
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Eight suicides

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Diane Arbus born: Mar 14, 1923, 1:30 am EST, New York, NY
Event: Jul 256, 1971, 12:00 pm EDT, New York, NY

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: [p Sa IC +1°07', r Sa IC -2°26' for rounded birth time] [t Ma sq p Mo 1°02'] - note that I don't have an exact time of death, noon means "no time known" +2
SNQ1: p Mo co r Ju (3'), t Ma sq p Mo (60') 0
Winner: Both are weak on orbs, but the time of day issue may explain that. In any case, the Q1 is solidly wrong (neutral-contradictory at best), so the Q2 gets it.


Ernest Hemingway born: Jul 21, 1899, 8:00 am CST, Oak Park, IL
Event: Jul 2, 1961, 6:00 am MST, Ketchum, ID

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r/p Sa IC (14') [p Sa co r Sa 0'] [r/p Pl MC nearly in orb for this even-hour birthtime], p Me Asc (11'), r Ma Asc (33'), p Me co r Ma (22'), t Sa sq p Mo (56') +3
SNQ1: r Ve EP-a (46') -2
Winner: Q2 outstandingly


Freddie Prinze born: Jun 22, 1954, 4:09 pm EDT, New York, NY
Event: Jan 28, 1977, 8:00 pm PST, Los Angeles, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: p Ve IC (13') -2
SNQ1: t Su MC (43'), t Pl sq p Mo (49'), t Me co p Mo (44') +2
Winner: Q1


James Forrestal born: Feb 15, 1892, 2:30 pm EST, Beacon, NY
Event: May 22, 1949, 1:45 am EDT, Bethesda, MD

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Sa MC (21'), t Su WP (45') [t Su sq r Sa 1°06'] t Ju sq p Mo (58') +1
SNQ1: t Ju sq p Mo (55') -2
Winner: Q2


Kurt Cobain born: Feb 20, 1967, 7:38 pm PST, Aberdeen, WA
Event: Apr 4, 1994, 12:00 pm PDT, Seattle, WA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (nothing) 0
SNQ1: r Ju Z (33'), t Ur N (33'), p Ma EP (58'), t Ve WP (1°12'), t Ur op r Ju (0') 0
Winner: I'm not sure I can give a point to either one. The Q1 has Mars (barely) and a run of benefics so, if anything, Q2 showing nothing is better than the 'something' the Q1 shows. This was a violent act that perhaps by some argument fits the exact transit of Uranus to his Jupiter coming to an angle, but not any usual interpretation of it. - I guess I have to rule against the Q1 and give this to the Q2 (but I don't like it).


Robin WIlliams born: Jul 21, 1951, 1:34 pm EST, Milwaukee, WI
Event: Aug 11, 2014, 12:00 pm PDT, Paradise Cay, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: p Ur WP (50'), r Ma WP-a (15'), t Ur IC (58'), r Ju IC (36'), p Ur sq r Ju (14') +2
SNQ1: t Ma EP (28') +2
Winner: Difficult call. Q1 is too simple. Q2 also has Mars along with other fitting planets. Q2 takes it (close call).


Virginia Woolf born: Jan 25, 1882, 12:15 PM GMT, London, England
Event: Mar 28, 1941, 12:00 pm BST, Lewes, England

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Me WP (16'); t Ne sq p Mo (26') +2
SNQ1: t Pl Asc (57'), p Ma EP 0°02' +2
Winner: This is a tough call. The Q1 angularities are exactly right, but so is the Q2 Moon exactly transited by Neptune. I could easily justify either or both. Because Neptune to Moon is a classic, building of the right psychological state, and this wasn't an abrupt, last-minute decision, I give the tip to Q2.


Jim Jones born: May 13, 1931, 10:00 pm CST, Lynn, IN
Event (mass murder & suicide): Nov 18, 1978, 7:00 pm AST, Jonestown, Guyana

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Mo WP (27'), t Mo MC (31'), p Mo N (56') [several key planets in the 2° range of angles and aspects, not listed] +1
SNQ1: t Su N (55') 0
Winner: The Q2 was in the center of a blast of influences before and after that seem to center on this time without actually hitting it - things that would be a fabulous fit but aren't in the orbs selected for this study. However, Jones' famous "Mother! Mother! Mother!" sermon cry at the end is stunning in its own way for the fact that all three Moons are the only angular planets - a highly unusual fit. Especially with the Q1 poor showing, Q2 gets the win.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Five executions

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Beatrice Cenci born: Feb 6, 1577 OS, 4:34 pm LMT, Rome, Italy
Event (beheading): Sep 11, 1599 NS, 12:00 pm LMT, $1N54'07", 12E27'53"

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Su EP (54') 0 to +1 (call it +1 for spotlight)
SNQ1: r Me EP-a (42'), t Ne WP-a (14'), t Ne op r Me (61') +2
Winner: Q1


Joan of Arc born: Jan 6, 1413, 5:36 pm LAT, Domrémy la Pucelle, France
Event (burning): May 30, 1431, 10:00 am LMT, Rouen, France

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r/p Sa Dsc (43'/25'), p Mo co r Ju (21'), sqr Asc (30') [almost sq r Ma-Ur] +2
SNQ1: p Mo co r Ju (18') -2
Winner: Q2


King Louis XVI born: Aug 23, 1754, 6:45 am, Versailles, France
Event (beheading): Jan 21, 1793, 12:00 pm, Paris, France

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Ur Asc (17'), r Ma WP (5'), r Pl Z (1°09') +3
SNQ1: r Sa Asc (53') +2
Winner: Either would be acceptable. This one vote is hardly definitive. Q2 makes a stronger showing and with closer orbs.


Marie Antoinette born: Nov 2, 1755, 7:30 pm LMT, Vienna, Austria
Event (beheading): Oct 16, 1793. 12:15 pm LMT, Paris, France

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (nothing) 0
SNQ1: t Ju Dsc (1°03'), t Ne WP (16') -1
Winner: I won't call this one. While t Neptune is extremely suitable, transiting Jupiter is not. (I'll allow the few minutes of extra orb since this is a rounded birth time.) - The SNQ just didn't have a voice on this one (the SQ took care of it fine).


Mata Hari born: Aug 7, 1876, 1:00 pm LMT, Leeuwarden, Netherlands
Event (firing squad): Oct 15, 1917, 5:14 am GMT, Vincennes, France

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: p Ma WP-a (54') +2
SNQ1: t Pl Dsc (43'), t Ne WP (14') [r Ne IC (1°18')] +2
Winner: Q1 (but both are OK and it's an even-hour birth time)
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Seven Plane Crash Deaths

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Big Bopper born: Oct 24, 1930, 8:00 pm CST, Sabine Pass, TX
Event: Feb 3, 1959, 12:55 am CST, 43N13'13" 93W22'53"

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Sa IC (16') +2
SNQ1: r Mo IC (55') 0
Winner: Q2


Buddy Holly born: Sep 7, 1936, 3:30 pm CST, Lubbock, TX
Event: Feb 3, 1959, 12:55 am CST, 43N13'13" 93W22'53"

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r/p Ur Z (9', 26') +2
SNQ1: (nothing) 0
Winner: Q2


John Denver born: Dec 31, 1943, 3:55 pm MWT, Roswell, NM
Event: Oct 21, 1997, 5:30 am PDT, Pacific Grove, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (nothing) 0
SNQ1: r Ve MC (1°02'); p Mo op r Ju (0°00') -3
Winner: Q2 nothing is more accurate than the thoroughly benefic Q1.


John F. Kennedy Jr. born: Nov 25, 1960, 12:22 am EST, Washington, DC
Event: Jul 16, 1999, 9:41 pm EDT, 41N17'37" 70W58'39"

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (nothing) 0
SNQ1: t Ju EP (52'), p Mo-Sa op (+58') 0
Winner: I won't call this one. Jupiter makes the Q1 entirely wrong and the barely-any-left Moon-Saturn progression is minor compared to the "concentrated on the day" Jupiter. OTOH, the Q2 has nothing (and I don't think I should give Q2 the benefit for not having the Jupiter since it also was clearly past the Mo-Sa).


Patsy Cline born: Sep 8, 1932, 11:15 pm EST, Winchester, VA
Event: May 5, 1963, 6:20 pm CST, Camden, TN

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (nothing) [Some things just outside 1°] 0
SNQ1: t Ne EP (38') [other malefics a little outside orb used] +1
Winner: Q1 because of the Neptune


Richie Valens born: May 13, 1941, 12:56 am PST, Los Angeles, CA
Event: Feb 3, 1959, 12:55 am CST, 43N13'13" 93W22'53"

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Me op p Mo (49') +1
SNQ1: r Mo EP (7'), t Ve N (31'), t Pl Z (47'), t Pl op r Ve (16') 0
Winner: This is a tough one because, while the Q1 Pluto is exactly right, the Venus is wrong and the transit Pluto-Venus doesn't apply to this type of event. That makes the Q1 a zero (equally strong contradictions) and the Q2 a barely-qualifying "transportation event" from a fast transit. I'm not going to call it either way.

Ricky Nelson born: May 8, 1940, 1:25 pm EDT, Teaneck, NJ
Event: Dec 31, 1985, 5:14 pm CST, De Kalb, TX

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Ma WP (25') +2
SNQ1: r Ma N (8'); p Mo sq p Sa (9') +3
Winner: Q1
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Six deaths by drug OD

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Jimi Hendrix Born: Nov 27, 1942, 10:15 am PWT, Seattle, WA
Event: Sep 18, 1970, 11:25 am BST, London, UK

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Ve MC (41'); t Ju sq p Mo (44') -2
SNQ1: t Me WP-a (33') 0
Winner: Q1


John Belushi Born: Jan 25, 1949, 5:12 am CST, Chicago, IL
Event: Mar 5, 1982, 12:30 pm PST, Los Angeles, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r/p Sa WP-a (-66', +85', av 10')' p Mo op r Sa (+34') +2
SNQ1: r Ve Asc (12'), r Ne Z (13'), r Ju Asc (64'), r Su EP (21'), r Ve-Ne sq (3'), r Ve-Ju co (53'), r Ju-Ne sq (50'), p Mo op r Sa (-31'), t Ur sq p Mo (10') -1
Winner: This one is tough. They are similar (sharing the single best indicator, p Mo op r Sa). Then the Q1 simultaneously looks more like something came to a peak AND that the benefics are so ferociously strong that this can't be right. Q2 inches it out


Lenny Bruce Born: Oct 13, 1025, 11:24 am EST, Mineola, NY
Event: Aug 3, 1966, 12:00 pm PDT, Hollywood, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Me Asc (42') 0
SNQ1: p Ur Dsc (50') 0
Winner: Neither really fits. Selecting neither. (The SQ handled the event exceptionally well this time.)


Marilyn Monroe Born: Jun 1, 1926, 9:30 am PST, Los Angeles, CA
Event: Aug 4, 1962, 8:00 pm PDT, Los Angeles, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: p Me MC (30'), t Ne EP (24'). t Ne sq r Me (55'); p Mo sq r Ma (36') +3
SNQ1: p Mo sq r Ma (40') +2
Winner: Q2


Michael Jackson Born: Aug 29, 1958, 11:53 pm CDT, Gary, IN
Event: Jun 25, 2009, 2:26 pm PDT, Los Angeles, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (p Mo-Ma tr 28') 0
SNQ1: r Ne Z (23'), p Ur WP-a (8'), p Mo sq r Ju (+60') +1
Winner: Q1


Prince Born: Jun 7, 1958, 6:17 pm, Minneapolis, MN
Event: Apr 21, 2016, 10:07 am CDT, Chanhassen, MN

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Sa EP-a (48') +2
SNQ1: (nothing) 0
Winner: Q2
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Deaths in Apollo 1 fire

Post by Jim Eshelman »

In addition to Edward White done above...


Roger Chaffee Born: Feb 15, 1935, 3:00 am EST, Grand Rapids, MI
Event: Jan 27, 1967, 6:3 pm EST, Cape Canaveral, FL

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: p Mo op r Ve (34') -1
SNQ1: r Ne MC (34'), p Mo op r Ve (29') +1
Winner: Both charts have a similarly close Moon-Venus opposition, which is inappropriate. Then, while the Q1 Neptune contact alone would be a great hit, it comes across differently within the Moon-Venus context. Both are wrong. I won't score this one.
-------------------------------


Virgil "Gus" Grissom Born: Apr 3, 1926, 6:00 pm CST, Mitchell, IN
Event: Jan 27, 1967, 6:3 pm EST, Cape Canaveral, FL

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Sa Dsc (63'), r Ur (10'), t Sa co r Ur (53'); p Mo-Ur sq (6') +2 at least
SNQ1: p Ne Asc (60'), t Me WP-a (43'); p Mo sq r Ur (24') +2
Winner: Q2
-------------------------------
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Fifteen other legendary deaths

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Anne Heche Born: May 25, 1969, 4:51 pm EDT, Cleveland, OH
Event (fiery car explosion): Aug 5, 2022, 10:55 am PDT, Mar Vista, Ca

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Ve WP (49'), p Me WP-a (29'); p Mo sq r Su (-61'), p Moon sq p Ma (+67'), Mo - Su/Ma (4') +1
SNQ1: t Ur Dsc (11') p Ne EP (28'), p Mo-Ma sq (39'), t Me co p Mo (1') +2
Winner: Q1
-------------------------------


Christa McAuliffe Born: Sep 2, 1948, 10:13 pm EDT, Boston, MA
Event (Challenger explosion): Jan 28, 1986, 11:39:13 am EST, Cape Canaveral, FL

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: p Mo N (20'), r Ma EP-a (27'), r Ve MC (36') +1
SNQ1: r Ju IC (60'), t Ur IC (10') -1
For either: p Ma op r Asc (13'), with t Mars nearby
Winner: Q2
-------------------------------


Jack Parsons Born: Oct 2, 1914, 8:45 pm PST, Los Angeles, CA
Event (explosion): Jun 17, 1952, 10:00 am PDT, Pasadena, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (nothing) 0
SNQ1: p Me MC (24'), t Ju IC (13'), t Ju op p Me (37'); p Mo sq r Ma (6') 0
Winner: In the Q1, the Moon-Mars progression is perfect and the exactly angular Jupiter transit op r Mercury is entirely wrong. This is a tie.
-------------------------------


King Ludwig II Born: Aug 24, 1845, 11:35 LMT. Munich, Germany
Event (drowning): Jun 13, 1886, 6:54 pm LMT, 47N54'14", 11E18'26"

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r/p Pl EP (59', 23'), p Ve Dsc (22'), t Mo Dsc (2'), t Mo co p Ve (24'); p Mo-Ma sq (15'), p Mo-Ne sq (41') +2 at least [Ve keeps it to +2]
SNQ1: (nothing) 0
Winner: Q2
-------------------------------


Whitney Houston Born: Aug 9, 1963, 8:55 pm EDT, Newark, NJ
Event (bathtub drowning): Feb 11, 2012, 3:55 pm PST, Beverly Hills, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (nothing) 0
SNQ1: [several malefics nearby but not in orb] p Mo sq r Ju (9') -2
Winner: Q2
-------------------------------


Benito Mussolini Born: Jul 29, 1883, 2:00 pm LT, Predappio, Italy
Event (mob murder): Apr 28, 1945, 4:10 pm CEDT, 45N59 9E12

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: [even-hr birth has p Jupiter near MC] 0
SNQ1: r Mo MC (10'), [p Sa Z (65')] +1
Winner: I think, for an even-hour time, we have to allow the extra 5' of orb (a third of a minute difference in birth time) and give this one to Q1.
-------------------------------


Cass Elliot Born: Sep 19, 1941, 9:00 pm EST, Baltimore, MD
Event (heart attack): Jul 29, 1974, 11:00 pm BST, London, UK

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: p Mo op r Asc (19') [If even-hour time is moved 3° later, perfect angularity; if even 2 mins later, gets t Saturn] 0
SNQ1: p Mo op r Ur (36'), t Ma sq p Mo (7') [if angles were 3° later, also gets t Saturn] +2
Winner: Q1
-------------------------------


Donald Bradley Born: May 16, 1925, 2:04 am CST, Geneva, NE
Event (cancer): Apr 25, 1974, 12:35 pm MST, Tucson, AZ

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Ma N (2') [several others nearby] +2
SNQ1: (nothing) 0
Winner: Q2
-------------------------------


Elvis Presley Born: Jan 8, 1935, 4:35 am CST, Tupelo, MI
Event: Aug 16, 1977, 2:50 pm CDT, Memphis, TN

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Me Asc (-36'), p Mo Asc (+34'), r Ne EP-a (6') [t Ma Z 1°38'] +1
SNQ1: t Mo co p Mo (26') 0
Winner: Q2 is a little better.
-------------------------------


Franklin D. Roosevelt Born: Jan 30, 1882, 8:45 pm LMT, Hyde Park, NY
Event (brain aneurism): Apr 12, 1945, 3:35 pm CWT, Warm Springs, GA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Mo Dsc (23') [t Sa on Dsc 1°30'], p Ve IC (38') 0
SNQ1: p Sa Dsc (45'), r Ju WP (55') [Neptunes & r Sun just outside orb] +1
Winner: This is tough, since Q1 is mixed (based on angles and Moon). FDR had a long-term p Sa sq r Sun that was 29' wide at death, and this brought Saturn to Dsc, so I'm going to give Q1 a very slim advantage.
-------------------------------


Margaret Edens Born: Aug 17, 1926, 10:20 am PST, Long Beach, CA
Event (struck by train): Jun 12, 1950, 7:27 am PDT, Fullerton, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Su MC (56') 0
SNQ1: p Ve EP (45'), r/p Ne EP-a (18', 34'), r Sun EP-a (44'), r Su-Ne co (26') -1
Winner: Q2 doesn't say much, but Q1 is too positive. I'm tempted not to choose one, but the Q1 is inferior to the neutral Q2, so the Q2 gets the point.
-------------------------------


Natalie Wood Born: Jul; 20, 1938, 11:16 am PST, San Francisco, CA
Event (apparent accident at sea): Nov 29, 1981, 2:00 am PST, 33N23, 118W25

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: p Sa Asc (17'), t Sa Dsc (59') +3
SNQ1: t Me MC (5'), t Ur MC (9'), p Me WP (16'), p Ju EP-a (12'), p Ma WP-a (22'), t Me-Ur co (4'), t Me-Ur sq p Me (21', 25'), p Ma-Ju op (34') +2
Winner: Both are interesting and mostly fitting, but the Q2 cuts right to the heart of what happened: she died. If current police opinion is correct, the Q1's angular Ma-Ju progression would have made her more likely to survive. Q2 wins.
-------------------------------


Sonny Bono Born: Feb 16, 1935, 9:21 pm EST, Detroit, MI
Event (deadly ski accident): Jan 5, 1998, 12:00 pm PST, South Lake Tahoe, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: {nothing) 0
SNQ1: p Mo co r Ju (2') -1
Winner: Q2
-------------------------------


Vincent Van Gogh Born: Mar 30, 1853, 11:00 am LMT, Zundert, Netherlands
Event (gunshot accident or suicide): Jul 27, 1890, 6:00 pm LMT, Auvers-sur-Oise, France

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Ur Dsc (36'), t Me Z (3'), t Me-Ur sq (33'); p Mo sq r/p Pl (5', 46') +2 at least
SNQ1: (nothing) 0
Winner: Q2
-------------------------------


Warren G. Harding Born: Nov 2, 1865, 2:30 pm LMT, Blooming Grove, OH
Event: Aug 2, 1923, 7:35 pm PST, San Francisco, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: p Mo Dsc (69'), t Ur sq p Mo (10') +1
SNQ1: r Su EP-a (20'), p Sa EP-a (2'), t Ju EP-a (47'), p Sa co r Su (18'). t Ju co p Sa (49') +1
Winner: Grumble! Can't it ever be easy? <sigh> the Sun-Saturn conjunction exactly angular is perfect... and then Jupiter conjoins them and the angle. This would still be a win except Uranus' transit to progressed Moon is also descriptive (plus it shows the significant travel and moving about that was happening during this time). Neither shows the fever distinctive to his illness and death (nor does the progressed Mercury-Venus-Mars conjunction). - The p Saturn on r Sun is exactly squared by t Mars (not on an angle), clearly the decisive final aspect of his life, and the Q1 brings it to the angle - so Q1 gets the point.
-------------------------------
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Diana & Charles

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Princess Diana born: Jul 1, 1961, 7:45 pm BST, Sandringham, England
Event (death in car crash): Aug 31, 1997, 12:23 am CEDT, Paris, France

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Ur N (15'), r Ve Asc (54'), t Ne MC (43'), p Sa MC (68') [p Mo-Ma sq 69'] +1
SNQ1: p Mo IC (43'), p Ma WP (44'), p Mo-Ma sq (0°01') +3
Winner: Natal Venus fits in this case because it was a romantic event before interrupted by paparazzi. But it's easily Q1 (the right aspect is exact and comes exactly to angles)
-------------------------------


Princess Diana born: Jul 1, 1961, 7:45 pm BST, Sandringham, England
Event (wedding): Jul 29, 1981, 11:28 am BST, 51N31, 0W06

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Ve WP-a (25'), p Mo co r/p Ne (44', 50') +3
SNQ1: p Mo co r/p Ne (1', 7') +1
Winner: Q2
-------------------------------


Prince Charles born: Nov 14, 1946, 9:14 pm GMT, Buckingham Palace
Event (wedding): Jul 29, 1981, 11:28 am BST, 51N31, 0W06

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: p Ve Dsc (35'), r Mo EP-a (43'), p Mo co r EP-a (9') +2
SNQ1: p Su MC (7') +1
Winner: Q2
-------------------------------
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Seven mostly positive events

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Carl Erskine born: Dec 13, 1926, 10:00 am CST, Anderson, IN
Event (pitched first televised no-hitter): May 12, 1956, 4:11 pm EDT, Brooklyn, NY

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: (nothing) 0
SNQ1: p Mo MC (6'), p Ve WP-a (45), t Ma Dsc (35') +2
Winner: Q1
-------------------------------


George Smith born: Apr 19, 1924, 8:00 am EST, New York, NY
Event (miracle survival, ejecting at Mach 1): Feb 26, 1955, 12:00 pm PST, South Laguna, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r/p Ur Asc (24', 47'), p Mo Z (13'), r Ju Z (34'), p Mo sq r/p Ur (+37', -34', Ur/Ur 2'), p Mo co r Ju (47') +2 [if there were also signs of violence, I'd give +3]
SNQ1: t Pl WP (13'), p Mo co r Ju (31'), p Mo sq r Ur (41') +2
Winner: Q2
-------------------------------


King Edward VIII born: Jun 23, 1894, 9:55 pm GMT, 51N27 0W18
Event (abdicated for love): Dec 11, 1936, 7:00 pm GMT, 51N29 0W36

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Ma Dsc (10') [various royal planets near angles just outside 1°] 0
SNQ1: (nothing) 0
Winner: Neither makes the case. This timing, for his public announcement, may not be the right moment of the event that mattered most in his experience of the process.
-------------------------------


Unnamed male born: Apr 24, 1948, 2:58 am CST, Iowa City, IA
Event (survived direct lightning strike): Sep 13, 1972, 2:30 pm MDT, Breckenridge, CO

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: [p Sa EP 1°15'], [r/p Pl EP-a 1°58'] 0
SNQ1: t Ve Asc (41') [r Su Z 1°04'] -2
Winner: Strikingly (pun intended), neither of these makes the case. This wasn't the chart method that told the story for this event. (In contrast, the SLR a day earlier was solid. The man had the scalp of his head and the soles of both feed blown off by the electricity.) I'll give Q2 a point because it is neutral and Q1 is negative.
-------------------------------


Aleister Crowley born: Oct 12,1875, 11:30 pm LMT, Leamington Spa, England
Event (received life-defining channeled text): Apr 8, 1904, 12:00 PM EET, Cairo, Egypt (began)

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: p Ve Z (57') +1
SNQ1: p Ju MC (14'), r Me MC (12'), t Mo Asc (67'), p Ju co r Me (2') +3
Winner: Q1
-------------------------------


James Eshelman born: Oct 10, 1954, 4:13 am CST, Rochester, IN
Event (received life-redirecting communication):

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: p Ve EP (2'), t Su op p Mo (52') +2
SNQ1: t Ju Dsc (10'), r Ne EP-a (27'), t Su op p Mo (30') +3
Winner: Q1
-------------------------------


John Glenn born: Jul 18, 1921, 4:00 pm EST, Cambridge, OH
Event (Friendship 7 launch): Feb 20, 1962, 9:47:39 am EST, Cape Canaveral, FL

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Pl Asc (56'), p Ur (14'), t Ve Dsc (46'), t Pl op r Ur (42'), t Ve co p Ur (60') [tie in p Me but too wide for angle] +3
SNQ1: p Ve EP (4'), r Su (7'), p Ve co r Su (11') +1
Winner: Q2
-------------------------------
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Nine negative events

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Charles Whitman born: Jun 24, 1941, 1:50 am EST, Lake Worth, FL
Event (Austin tower murders): Aug 1, 1966, 11:48 am CST, 30N17 97W44

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r/p Ne N (32', 56'), r Ma Z (49'), r Ma-Ne op (17', 7'), p Ju EP-a (58'), p Mo-Ur co (12') +3
SNQ1: p Mo MC (53'), p Mo Asc (3'), r/p Ur Asc (+29', -41'), p Mo co r/p Ur (+29', -38') +2
Winner: This is extremely close! Do we judge it as a day his psychosis broke loose and he abruptly did something divergent, or primarily as a day that he erupted into some out-of-the-ordinary behavior per se? The Q2 shows it a little bit better but relies mostly on patterns that had recurred his whole life, while the Q1 shows something unique coming to a head. I'm tempted not to pick one over the other, but Q2 does have the higher score.
-------------------------------


Richard Speck born: Dec 6, 1941, 1:00 am CST, Kirkwood, IL
Event (Chicago murders): Jul 14, 1966, 11:00 pm CDT, Chicago, IL

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Me WP-a (56') 0
SNQ1: (nothing) 0
Winner: Neither had anything. This was not the chart that described this event.
-------------------------------


Gloria Estefan born: Sep 1, 1957, 1:00 pm EST, Havana, Cuba
Event (injury in bus accident): May 20, 1990, 12:00 pm EST, Scranton, PA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Pl IC (14'), p Ve N (51') +2
SNQ1: p Ju IC (63'), t Ne WP (63') -1
Winner: Q2. (That transiting Pluto is quite stark.)
-------------------------------


George Wallace born: Aug 25, 1919, 3:30 am CWT, Clio, AL
Event (shot and disabled): May 15, 1972, 4:00 pm EDT, Laurel, MO

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Ve N (0'), p Ma IC (12'), t Sa (48'), t Me sq p Mo (15') +1
SNQ1: p Sun Dsc (6'), t Ur (42'), p Mo co r Ma (17') +2
Winner: Tough call. I have to give it to the two malefics closely angular in the Q2.
-------------------------------


Marion DeSio born:
Event (triple ankle fracture accident): Sep 1, 2023, 3:30 pm PDT, Los Olivos, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: r Ma EP (2'), r Ur Asc (11'), r Sa WP-a (26'), t Sa Dsc (63') +3
SNQ1: r Ju Z (34'), t Ne MC (41') -2
Winner: Q2 easily
-------------------------------


Matthew Quellas born: Aug 19, 1941, 7:35 pm EST, Painesville, OH
Event (life-altering accident): Feb 3, 1968, 11:04 am CST, 37N07 89W12

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Ma WP (12'), p Ju MC (57') [other key planets just outside orb incl tPl-pSu 8'] +2
SNQ1: r/p Sa Z (58', 34'), t Ve op r Mo (41') +1 at least
Winner: Q2
-------------------------------


Donald Bradley born: May 16, 1925, 2:04 am CST, Geneva, NE
Event (apartment robbed): May 1, 1963, 6:00 am EST, New York, NY

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Sa Asc (16'), t Ne Z (60') +2 at least
SNQ1: t Ve EP (57'), r Ju EP-a (47'), p Ma WP (51'), p Mo-Ju op (26') -2
Winner: Q2 easily!
-------------------------------


Ralph Edwards born: Jun 13, 1913, 12:13 am MST, Menno, CO
Event (lost home to fire): Dec 26, 1956, 3:00 am PST, Malibu, CA

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: t Ne Asc (15'), t Ur MC (31'), p Ur IC (38'), t Ur op r Ur (7'), p Mo-Ve co (2'). p Mo sq r Ur (50') +2
SNQ1: p Mo-Ur sq (50'), t Ur sq p Mo (57') +1
Winner: Both have something to offer, but the stronger showing is Q2.
-------------------------------


Richard Nixon born: Jan 9, 1913, 9:35 pm PST, Yorba Linda, CA
Event (resignation): Aug 9, 1974, 12:00 pm EDT, Washington, DC

SNQ2 vs. SNQ1
SNQ2: p Ne EP-a (1'), t Ve EP-a (40'), t Me Asc (44'), t Ve co p Ne (41') +1
SNQ1: t Ju Z (47'), r Mo MC (66') -2
Winner: Q2
-------------------------------
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Q1 vs. Q2 - Conclusions

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Of this last run of charts, the final score was: Q2 was better 55 times; Q1 was better 28 times. Several things to say about this:
  • As anticipated, the Q2 came out stronger.
  • In prior (smaller, less picky) tests I've done over the years, the Q2 has beat the Q1 somewhere between 2-to-1 and 3-to-1. This larger group came in at the bottom edge of that, not quite 2-to-1.
  • Bradley was quite firm that in every comparison he ran, the Q2 beat the Q1 3-to-1 repeatedly. I can't confirm that level of superiority with the current test, though Q2 still "wins."
  • And yet, there were some stunning Q1 charts along the way.
An idea that I have resisted for decades is that the Q1 and Q2 are both valid. I've resisted this partly because the Q2 consistently shows itself better/stronger (though the amount has changed) and, especially, because the idea that one of astrology's most important predictive methods, Secondary Progressions, has two almost the same rates where one lags behind the other in an amount that slowly increases through life.

Despite my resistance to and dislike of the idea, it might be true. Nonetheless, I feel I have more work to do before concluding that it's true. (If it were true, it would at least resolve the one nagging exceptional showing of the Q1, which is in progressions for the U.S. natal chart.)

After thinking about it, I think I need to take a fresh look at just how effective each of these methods is on its own - not as an either-or comparison (since that will never be able to show if either-or is the wrong idea). I will now go back and assign a score to each chart for each event and tally them to see if either stands on its own (or perhaps both).

I don't expect a clear showing in every event. Quotidians don't seem to work that way. We have other valid quotidian systems (SQ, PSSR) and experience shows they don't all show for every event. (Once TM has all these features, we can do an even more useful study of all the variations.) In the final assessment I will find a way not to 'punish' either method for not happening to show a particular event.

I will rank according to the criteria that have served well in mundane chart analysis:
  • +3 Excellent (Exceptional). Outstanding, symbolically pure and eloquent. No contradiction (except very minor factors overwhelmed by otherwise perfect symbolism). Necessarily involves at least two independent factors. – Relatively few of these scores are given.
  • +2 Very Good (Very Satisfactory). Has strong, distinctive indications typical of the event, with no strong contradictions.
  • +1 Good (Satisfactory). On balance, more descriptive of the event than not.
  • 0 Neutral (Noncommittal). No strong pro or con factor sufficient to say that the chart leans any direction.
  • 0 Neutral (Mixed). Factors consistent with the event, and factors contrary to the event, are approximately equal in strength, with no clear way to tip the balance toward Good or Bad.
  • -1 Bad (Unsatisfactory). On balance, more at odds with the event than not.
  • -2 Very Bad (Very Unsatisfactory). Has strong, distinctive indications contrary to the nature of the event, with no strong contradictions.
  • -3 Unacceptable (Irremediably wrong). Irremediably wrong without redemption. Necessarily involves at least two independent factors. – Relatively few of these are given.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Q1 vs. Q2 - Conclusions Part 2

Post by Jim Eshelman »

Scoring each individual chart brings similar conclusions:
  1. The Q2 is better.
  2. The Q1 seems valid on its own.
Here are the breakdowns:

Q2
  • +3: 13
  • +2: 36
  • +1: 15
  • 0: 25
  • -1: 3
  • -2: 2
  • -3: 0
Q1
  • +3: 5
  • +2: 30
  • +1: 16
  • 0: 21
  • -1: 9
  • -2: 10
  • -3: 1
As in all such analyses, we have to consider that astrology is sufficiently elastic that there are several separate ways we may find a given chart to be accurately descriptive. That is, the method biases toward at least slightly higher scores (perhaps as much as +1 higher). Nonetheless, we can easily compare these two methods side-by-side on matched criteria.

The two rates had a similar number of times when they scored zero - either had nothing to say, or too neutral, or indications were about equally right and wrong. Q2 was neutral 25 times, Q1 21 times. I'm going to start by ignoring the neutral charts.

Q2
  • +3: 13
  • +2: 36
  • +1: 15
    --------------------
  • -1: 3
  • -2: 2
  • -3: 0
Q1
  • +3: 5
  • +2: 30
  • +1: 16
    --------------------
  • -1: 9
  • -2: 10
  • -3: 1
Q2 clearly led on +3 (Exceptional) scores, which are rare scores. Q2 had 13 of these and Q1 had 5. Since any method can get exceptional scores in a few cases, I'd be willing to ignore the Q1's few examples if the method doesn't otherwise show well.

For scores +2 (Very Good) or better, Q2 had 49, Q1 had 35. While Q2 had nearly a half more events in this category, the Q1 showing (70% as many events as the Q2) is impressive.

For scores +1 (more right than wrong) or better, Q2 had 64, Q1 had 51. This is a closer match. Q2 still shows as the better technique, but Q1 getting 80% as many "adequate" scores can't be ignored.

Q1 had more occasions inaccurately describing events. Q1 is the only one that had a -3 (totally unacceptable) score. Overall, it had 20 events of -1 or worse score (meaning that the chart was more wrong than right). In contrast, Q2 had only five events that were wrongly described. Since it doesn't help us to get wrong descriptions, this is a further indication (even if we consider the Q1 valid to some degree) to favor the Q1.

Comparing good results to bad results, Q2 had 64 positive, 5 negative, or a +12.8 ratio of right-to-wrong. Q1 had 51 positive, 20 negative, or +2.55 ratio of right-to-wrong. To put this differently: The Q2 had about 13 times more correct answers than incorrect (8% wrong), while the Q1 had nearly half as many incorrect as correct (39% wrong).

I cannot rely on the Q1 with these negative numbers. On the other hand, there were some really excellent examples of Q1, including examples where the Q2 had nothing to offer. Therefore, I'm willing to entertain that the Q1 is an authentic system, but not one that reliably identifies significant events. (It only occasionally identifies them.)

In comparison to the "seven out of eight times right" (87.5%) rule of thumb that distinguishes valid mundane astrology techniques, Q2 would be rated valid, Q1 invalid. But that may be too simple an assessment.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Are You Sirius?
Posts: 19574
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Q1 vs. Q2 - Afterward

Post by Jim Eshelman »

When I posted the last piece of this study at 11:00 AM today (March 8, 2025 at my home), my SNQ2 (adjusted by using the sidereal year) had the following:

(nothing angular)
2°41' Can - p Uranus
17°53' Tau - t Jupiter
3°20' Can - r Uranus
3°34' Lib - p Moon
3°37' Can - r Jupiter
3°39' Lib - p Neptune
4°07' Can - p Jupiter

In comparison, my SNQ1 had the following:

28°15' Vir - p MC
28°55' Sag - r Mars

1°17' Lib - p Moon
1°20' Lib - r Neptune
16°49' Aqu - p Mars

It does seem to me that this has been primarily an undertaking described by a progressed Moon-Uranus square (even with Neptune also part of it) than one described by a progressed Moon-Neptune conjunction alone - or, in this case, compounded as Mars-Neptune. (In the Q2 I had progressed Moon to natal Neptune and progressed Mars seeks ago and definitely had to fight off being sick at the time.)

The contrast at 11 AM today seems obvious to me.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
Post Reply