R.S.V.P.
Posted: Wed May 10, 2017 9:32 pm
The subject line is a bit of a joke. Decades ago I suggested to Gary Duncan that if we ever had the resources to take Bradley original work with the SVP further, any revision should be called the R.S.V.P.
I'm not proposing a revision. (Certainly not yet.) I'm thinking, though, that we are at the place to begin assessing just how minutely accurate the SVP is. I have generally said that it is either exactly right, or no more than few seconds off. I think we now have the data to take a serious look at how accurate that statement is.
Once Bradley knew that the "Spica fiducial" needed to be shifted 0°06' of arc, he actually used very little data to determine how much more it needed refining. From "Unveiling a New Tool," we quote:
1. Once the zodiac was adjusted 0°06' from the 29° Virgo Spica working definition of the prior few years, the additional 0°00'05" correction was based on only 27 events. They were surely well chosen events... but there were only 27 of them.
2. The method of refinement was Q2 progression of the Capsolar.
3. Where did that 0°00'05" figure come from? It was simply that he concluded from those 27 events that the Capsolar angles needed to be adjusted half a degree, i.e., its time needed to be adjusted two minutes of time (in round minutes). In two clock minutes, the Sun moves about 5". This was not some great rounding down to the second from a vast number of events. It was 27 events that told him the Capsolars needed to be adjusted two minutes of time. If he's a minute off, this changes the boundaries of the zodiac 2"-3", hence my "not off by more than few seconds."
My proposal is to go through SMA and, of its 211 events, select only those that (1) have something on CapQ angles within 1° that triggered the event, (2) the triggering planet(s) is/are very clearly appropriate and not ambiguous, and (3) the event is pretty tightly timed rather than, say, rounded to the day. From these, I will tabulate how much the relevant planet is off the angle.
This may be a futile test. For example, it may be that as long as the planet is within the 2° orb, it is active, so it doesn't matter whether it is 6' closer or 10' wider. Nonetheless, this should be interesting.
Since I have to recalculate a lot of charts, I will do this over several days as time permits.
I'm not proposing a revision. (Certainly not yet.) I'm thinking, though, that we are at the place to begin assessing just how minutely accurate the SVP is. I have generally said that it is either exactly right, or no more than few seconds off. I think we now have the data to take a serious look at how accurate that statement is.
Once Bradley knew that the "Spica fiducial" needed to be shifted 0°06' of arc, he actually used very little data to determine how much more it needed refining. From "Unveiling a New Tool," we quote:
Look closely at this statement. Here are some facts to take away with you:Angular cusps of the solar ingresses are very sensitive to malefic transits, as witness their synchronization with tragic happenings. Following this cue to correct our charts [after the initial 6' correction required by the lunar ingresses]..., we found from inspection of ephemeris positions for the hours of 27 major catastrophes of the past that an average displacement of ten minutes of time would yield the desired correction. But when it became conspicuous that the dating of events was a matter of progression via the "Quotidian rate," we were provided with a means to pinpoint [exact timing]... This process soon led to the realization that only a two-minute difference sufficed. In other words, only a 5" correction of the [previously obtained tentative value] was called for.
1. Once the zodiac was adjusted 0°06' from the 29° Virgo Spica working definition of the prior few years, the additional 0°00'05" correction was based on only 27 events. They were surely well chosen events... but there were only 27 of them.
2. The method of refinement was Q2 progression of the Capsolar.
3. Where did that 0°00'05" figure come from? It was simply that he concluded from those 27 events that the Capsolar angles needed to be adjusted half a degree, i.e., its time needed to be adjusted two minutes of time (in round minutes). In two clock minutes, the Sun moves about 5". This was not some great rounding down to the second from a vast number of events. It was 27 events that told him the Capsolars needed to be adjusted two minutes of time. If he's a minute off, this changes the boundaries of the zodiac 2"-3", hence my "not off by more than few seconds."
My proposal is to go through SMA and, of its 211 events, select only those that (1) have something on CapQ angles within 1° that triggered the event, (2) the triggering planet(s) is/are very clearly appropriate and not ambiguous, and (3) the event is pretty tightly timed rather than, say, rounded to the day. From these, I will tabulate how much the relevant planet is off the angle.
This may be a futile test. For example, it may be that as long as the planet is within the 2° orb, it is active, so it doesn't matter whether it is 6' closer or 10' wider. Nonetheless, this should be interesting.
Since I have to recalculate a lot of charts, I will do this over several days as time permits.
