Solunars by Aldebaran Sidereal Academy

Weekly and daily timing indicators in Sidereal mundane astrology are wondrously accurate. The question is, how do we get a potential event filtered down to the month or less so that we can apply our knowledge of weekly and daily timing to predict a particular kind of event on a particular day.

One of the bigger challenges is "bridging the middle" - trying to bring events (most of the time already shown in the Capsolar) down to a narrower time of year. One theory of how to do this is to narrow the time frame with the other quarterly solar ingresses. I've begun a pilot of examining this matter, using a couple of the larger group of sample events - earthquakes and fires.

I've completed the first pass on examining the earthquakes. On the question of, "Did the event in question manifest during a quarter of the year when the quarterly solar ingresses most supported it," the score is almost perfect! However, something I've learned already is that we don't want to let the perfect become the enemy of the adequate. That is, in looking at the four solar ingresses of a year to determine when a particular kind of event likely occurred, we aren't looking for the best fit among the quarterly solars - just an adequate fit. An event will show in a second-best period as long as the period is adequate to the event's needs. Below, I will list what quarters are adequate, and also will list which seems the best fit. As you will see, I will nearly always capture the actual date odf the event within the broader category, but will be very bad at matching an event date by trying to pick the best period.

A second thing learned is that - due to dormancy and flow-through - one ingress may apply to nearly the entire year. Our range often isn't narrowed much. But it is usually (always?) narrowed some.

Here is what I have found so far, using the earthquake samples ranked according to quarters.

Numbers represent quarters of the year, where Capsolar begins the first quarter, etc.

GENROKU EARTHQUAKE
EVENT: 4th Q
ADEQUATE: 1-2 (Arisolar is dormant, so Capsolar continues), 4th
BEST: 4th
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE (1906)
EVENT: 2nd Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 2-4 (Arisolar covers 3/4 of year)
BEST: 2-4
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

AVEZZANO EARTHQUAKE
EVENT: 4th Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 2, 4
BEST: 2
SCORE Y on adequate, N on best

GREAT KANTO EARTHQUAKE
EVENT: 3rd Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 2-4
BEST: 2-4
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

LONG BEACH EARTHQUAKE
EVENT: 1st Q
NOTE: Capsolar is neutral, so prior Cansolar is consulted
ADEQUATE: 1, 3
BEST: 3 [UNLESS we actually count the prior year's Cansolar as the Capsolar replacement for the new year; then 1st Q is best]
SCORE Y on adequate, N? on best

OLYMPIA EARTHQUAKE
EVENT: 1st Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 2,
BEST: 2
SCORE Y on adequate, N on best

TEHACHAPI EARTHQUAKE
EVENT: 3rd Q
ADEQUATE: 4 <weak>
BEST: 4
SCORE N on adequate, N on best

KAMCHATKA EARTHQUAKE
EVENT: 4th Q
ADEQUATE: 1-2, 4 [Prior Cansolar stands in for Capsolar]
BEST: 4
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE (1957)
EVENT: 1st Q
ADEQUATE: 1
BEST: 1
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

GREAT CHILEAN EARTHQUAKE
EVENT: 2nd Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 2, 3
BEST: 2
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

GREAT ALASKAN EARTHQUAKE
EVENT: 1st Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 2, 4?
BEST: 2
SCORE Y on adequate, N on best

SYLMAR EARTHQUAKE
EVENT: 1st Q
ADEQUATE: 1st Q
BEST: 1st Q
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

LOMA PRIETA EARTHQUAKE
EVENT: 3rd Q
ADEQUATE: 3-4
BEST: 3-4
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

NORTHRIDGE EARTHQUAKE
EVENT: 1st Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 4
BEST: 4th
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

SUMATRA-ANDAMAN EARTHQUAKE
EVENT: 4th Q
ADEQUATE: 1-2, 3-4
BEST: 3-4
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

TOHUKO EARTHQUAKE
EVENT: 1st Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 2, 4?
BEST: 2
SCORE Y on adequate, N on best


EVENTS: 16
No. WHERE CORRECT (ADEQUATE): 15
No. WHERE CORRECT (BEST): 9

I still need to do the 19 fires for comparison.

BTW, some of you might be interested in how I'm undertaking this study.

Starting point: Weekly/daily chart indicators are close to 100% accurate, but we don't have a means of discerning possible events from actual events - for determining when an actual significant event will emerge from dozens of possibilities.

One way to frame this question is: Given that Capsolars alone accurately describe major events 85-90% of the time, how do we move from "something of this type will happen this year" to "something of this type will happen this week"? What are the requirements for the middle period? The middle-term periods are covered by lunar ingresses and the solar quarters, among other techniques.

I'm creating an artificial scenario in order to learn (hopefully) how all of this works. The scenario is artificial because it's contrived and doesn't completely match real-world prediction efforts. I've postulated it like a game: Presume someone tells you that such and such event happened (and described the event) at a particular place in one specific year - and your job is to decide when in that year it occurred. Obviously we don't have these advantages under real conditions, but it gives us a starting point for observing how things work.

In this challenge of moving from a Capsolar for a known location down to a specific week, I've identified four "channels" - four roads to go down in order to move from the known year level down to a tighter specific time of year. These four channels are ways that are middle-term techniques that are known to identify moderate periods of time.
1. Transits to Capsolar (and, to a lesser extent, Cansolar) angles and Moon.
2. SQ Moon of Capsolar (and, to a lesser extent, Cansolar) making aspects to ingress and transiting planets.
3. Solar quarters.
4. Caplunars.

So, the plan (which is very labor intensive) is to go through the events microscopically analyzing each of these channels. I'm starting with my two largest and surest groups - earthquakes and fires - as pilots. I'm presently working through the solar quarters. (I picked this because, having done half a dozen of the earthquakes, it became clear that this was the best starting place.)

I have finished the fires. Here are the results.

IROQUOIS THEATER FIRE
EVENT: 4th Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 4
BEST: 4
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

COCOANUT GROVE NIGHTCLUB FIRE
EVENT: 4th Q
ADEQUATE: 1
BEST: 1
SCORE N on adequate, N on best

CONWAY THEATER FIRE
EVENT: 4th Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 2, 3, 4
BEST: 1st or 2nd
SCORE Y on adequate, N on best

TRIANGLE SHIRTWAITS CO. FIRE
EVENT: 1st Q
ADEQUATE: 1-2, 3, 4?
BEST: 1-2
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

GREAT LONDON FIRE
EVENT: 3rd Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 2, 3, 4
BEST: 2nd
SCORE Y on adequate, N on best

GREAT CHICAGO FIRE
EVENT: 3rd Q
ADEQUATE: 3
BEST: 3rd
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

OHIO STATE PRISON FIRE
EVENT: 2nd Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 2-3, 4
BEST: 2nd-3rd
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

WINECOFF HOTEL FIRE
EVENT: 4th Q
ADEQUATE: 1-2, 3, 4
BEST: 1st
SCORE Y on adequate, N on best

NITEROI FIRE
EVENT: 4th Q
ADEQUATE: 2-4
BEST: 2nd-4th
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

APOLLO 1 FIRE
EVENT: 1st Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 2, 3
BEST: 4th
SCORE Y on adequate, N on best

L'INNOVATION DEPARTMENT STORE FIRE
EVENT: 2nd Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 2, 3
BEST: 2nd
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

CINEMA REX FIRE
EVENT: 3rd Q
ADEQUATE: 1-2, 3, 4
BEST: 4th
SCORE Y on adequate, N on best

DURUNKAH FIRE
EVENT: 4th Q
ADEQUATE: 1-2, 4
BEST: 4th
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

FRIENDSHIP THEATER FIRE
EVENT: 4th Q
ADEQUATE: 2-3, 4
BEST: 4th
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

BAKU METRO FIRE
EVENT: 4th Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 2, 3, 4
BEST: 4th
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

LUOYANG CHRISTMAS FIRE
EVENT: 4th Q
ADEQUATE: 1-2?
BEST: 1st-2nd
SCORE N on adequate, N on best

YCUA BOLANOS FIRE
EVENT: 3rd Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 2
BEST: 1st
SCORE N on adequate, N on best

LAME HORSE NIGHTCLUB FIRE
EVENT: 4th Q
ADEQUATE: 4
BEST: 4th
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

KISS NIGHTCLUB FIRE
EVENT: 1st Q
ADEQUATE: 1, 2, 3
BEST: 1st
SCORE Y on adequate, Y on best

EVENTS: 19
No. WHERE CORRECT (ADEQUATE): 16
No. WHERE CORRECT (BEST): 11

For the earthquakes, 15 of 16 sets were correct for adequate (94%), but only 9 or 16 (56%) for best.

For the fires, 16 of 19 were correct for adequate (84%), but only 11 of 19 (58%) for best. These numbers are close to each other.

Overall in the two groups, therefore, when assessing an adequate symbolism from a solar quarter, 31 out of 35 were correct (89%). When assessing the best quarter, we only matched the event 20 out of 35 times, or 57% of the time.

This pilot seems to substantiate the idea that quarterly ingresses can time the quarter of the event a high percentage of the time if we go for adequate symbolism; but we will throw ourselves off almost half the time if we try to pick the quarter with the best symbolism.