"Dormant" ingresses and "flow-through"
Posted: Fri May 12, 2017 10:24 am
(This is a pivotal post, showing a significant shift in thinking that has been the key to much of value in Sidereal Mundane Astrology since then. It was posted August 31, 2013, 4:44 PM PDT.)
I've just come across something that is rather stunning... in the sense of knocking me for a loop. If it's true, it is a significant new finding. If not, then it's a land-mine. May I share it and solicit other views?
Background: General Ingress Behavior
1. We have known since Bradley's original discovery of Sidereal solar and lunar ingresses in the mid-1950s that all four solar ingresses and all four lunar ingresses are operative more or less all of the time. This makes for a very complicated picture. Happily, most of them aren't relevant most of the time, and there seems to be a firm pecking order on which ones have the loudest voices (and, therefore, are worth watching at all).
2. One place where all of the ingresses seem to have continued say is this: Bradley observed from the beginning that all four solar ingresses remain sensitive for a full 12 months to transits to their angles. I've seen this working frequently also. The only reason for not tracking them rigorously is that we generally don't need to.
3. No such observation was ever made / published concerning lunar ingresses. One might speculate... but, I'm just saying, this hasn't been part of the doctrine historically.
Background: Ingress Dormancy
1. During my current project, I've identified a principle of ingress dormancy. The principle is, simply, that an ingress that has nothing to say can be treated as if it doesn't exist. Mostly this means: An ingress that says nothing is NOT saying that nothing will happen - it is simply a silent voice in the chorus, and the song goes on around it. As a working fiction, I've suggested we act as if the ingress simply didn't occur.
Background: Observations of Cansolars
1. Cansolars and their quotidians have shown themselves to be nearly as strong as Capsolars, including having some level of operative hand for a full 12 months. However, this doesn't hold up uniformly. Cansolars (treated as "year charts") come up with overall scores far inferior to that of Capsolars. Cansolar Quotidians score little better than HALF as well as Capsolar Quotidians for timing events.
2. Yet, in the absence of a Capsolar voice, Cansolars are champs! Out of 108 events, the CapQ alone timed and described the event in a satisfactory or very satisfactory way 88 times, or 81% of the time. Of the remaining 20 instances, the CanQ provided satisfactory or very satisfactory contacts 14 times. With the principle of "CapQ times it or, failing that, CanQ backs it up," 94% of the events were identified accurately by time, place, and nature of event - an astoundingly high figure!
3. Similarly, for events occurring between mid-January and mid-July (the first 6 months after a Capsolar), Cansolar accuracy was poor. 40% of the time it was silent or contradictory. Most of the rest of the time it was (at best) no better than the Capsolar. HOWEVER, if we only count the 15 instances where the Capsolar was dormant, the Cansolar was satisfactory or better in all but 2 instances, that is, 87% of the time. That's very good!
4. This led to the idea that a "best practices" approach is to ignore the Cansolar on its face (that is, not counting transits and quotidians) if the Capsolar actually has something to say (is non-dormant).
Background: Flow-Through
1. These findings with regard to the Cansolar led me to an idea we might call "flow-through." At least in the specific case of the Cansolar (which is nearly as strong as the Capsolar, though mostly contained in the first six months of its life), the Cansolar effects flow through into the Capsolar period if the Capsolar is silent.
2. That's as far as I'd taken the "flow-through" idea until an hour ago...
What about dormant Caplunars?
Several cases exist where a significant event occurs immediately after a Caplunar occurs, but the Caplunar has nothing to say about it. Nearly all of these became non-issues with the doctrine of dormancy - that is, I simply ignored the Caplunar - it had nothing to say, so we ignored the chart.
And dormancy is really the only noticeable problem with these charts. It's not alike a major event happens right after a Caplunar and the Caplunar provides opposite symbolism - that is very rare. I do have two examples of that in front of me - and both are "problem events" in other respects. One is Pres. Harding's death (a story in its own right, where the universe, from almost any angle, seemed to be saying it was a happy event!), and the Ludlow massacre. But these are rare.
The usual problem was that the Caplunar would occur and say nothing. Ignoring a "silent" or "dormant" chart solved that problem.
But it left me wondering...
If "flow-through" worked with a dormant Capsolar, did it also work with a dormant Caplunar?
Preliminary (I repeat, preliminary!) checking suggests... grumble!... that it does.
Flow-through on Dormant Caplunars
If we take literally (rather than just figuratively) that we are to treat a dormant Caplunar as if it isn't even there, does that mean that the prior ingress is still operative? Bradley did think, after all, that they each had a life of their own. Is this what distinguishes whether one of the minor charts seems to continue "working" past its week?
I have 5 examples in front of me where the "chart of the week" was the Caplunar, and it was dormant. I decided to check the Liblunar right before (unless it, too, was dormant) and see if it described the event. Here is what I found...
1. JFK Assasination. Bingo! Prior Liblunar had Saturn rising (2°), 18' from square Neptune. (For Washington, Pluto was exactly setting - a Jupiter-Pluto opposition across the horizon.)
2. Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire. Bingo! Prior Liblunar had a Mars-Uranus conjunction straddling the Ascendant, Uranus 0°37' above, Mars 2°20' below, their midpoint within a degree of the Ascendant.
3. Reagan shot. Bingo! The Liblunar Ascendant closely squared an opposition of Jupiter-Saturn to Sun-Mars - everything necessary do describe an attempt to kill the President (Sun + malefics) that failed (Jupiter). All the planets' positions averaged 10°17' Gemini, or 15' from the Ascendant.
4. Friendship Theater Fire. No cookie! Venus exactly rising. (No, no, no, "Friendship" in the name doesn't make this a hit <g>.)
5. Ycua Bolanos market fire. The prior Liblunar also was dormant. Rolling back to the prior Canlunar, we get at least half a bingo: Exactly rising was a 0°23' Sun-Moon conjunction. (Sun-Moon conjunctions and oppositions have an extraordinarily high frequency in ingresses for major fires.) The only other foreground planet was Saturn, though it was a bit wide.
So there you have some samples. Mostly damn good, not perfect. Enough to show that maybe... just maybe... there is something to examine here.
I'm interested in examples known to others and, secondarily, any thoughts on this.
I've just come across something that is rather stunning... in the sense of knocking me for a loop. If it's true, it is a significant new finding. If not, then it's a land-mine. May I share it and solicit other views?
Background: General Ingress Behavior
1. We have known since Bradley's original discovery of Sidereal solar and lunar ingresses in the mid-1950s that all four solar ingresses and all four lunar ingresses are operative more or less all of the time. This makes for a very complicated picture. Happily, most of them aren't relevant most of the time, and there seems to be a firm pecking order on which ones have the loudest voices (and, therefore, are worth watching at all).
2. One place where all of the ingresses seem to have continued say is this: Bradley observed from the beginning that all four solar ingresses remain sensitive for a full 12 months to transits to their angles. I've seen this working frequently also. The only reason for not tracking them rigorously is that we generally don't need to.
3. No such observation was ever made / published concerning lunar ingresses. One might speculate... but, I'm just saying, this hasn't been part of the doctrine historically.
Background: Ingress Dormancy
1. During my current project, I've identified a principle of ingress dormancy. The principle is, simply, that an ingress that has nothing to say can be treated as if it doesn't exist. Mostly this means: An ingress that says nothing is NOT saying that nothing will happen - it is simply a silent voice in the chorus, and the song goes on around it. As a working fiction, I've suggested we act as if the ingress simply didn't occur.
Background: Observations of Cansolars
1. Cansolars and their quotidians have shown themselves to be nearly as strong as Capsolars, including having some level of operative hand for a full 12 months. However, this doesn't hold up uniformly. Cansolars (treated as "year charts") come up with overall scores far inferior to that of Capsolars. Cansolar Quotidians score little better than HALF as well as Capsolar Quotidians for timing events.
2. Yet, in the absence of a Capsolar voice, Cansolars are champs! Out of 108 events, the CapQ alone timed and described the event in a satisfactory or very satisfactory way 88 times, or 81% of the time. Of the remaining 20 instances, the CanQ provided satisfactory or very satisfactory contacts 14 times. With the principle of "CapQ times it or, failing that, CanQ backs it up," 94% of the events were identified accurately by time, place, and nature of event - an astoundingly high figure!
3. Similarly, for events occurring between mid-January and mid-July (the first 6 months after a Capsolar), Cansolar accuracy was poor. 40% of the time it was silent or contradictory. Most of the rest of the time it was (at best) no better than the Capsolar. HOWEVER, if we only count the 15 instances where the Capsolar was dormant, the Cansolar was satisfactory or better in all but 2 instances, that is, 87% of the time. That's very good!
4. This led to the idea that a "best practices" approach is to ignore the Cansolar on its face (that is, not counting transits and quotidians) if the Capsolar actually has something to say (is non-dormant).
Background: Flow-Through
1. These findings with regard to the Cansolar led me to an idea we might call "flow-through." At least in the specific case of the Cansolar (which is nearly as strong as the Capsolar, though mostly contained in the first six months of its life), the Cansolar effects flow through into the Capsolar period if the Capsolar is silent.
2. That's as far as I'd taken the "flow-through" idea until an hour ago...
What about dormant Caplunars?
Several cases exist where a significant event occurs immediately after a Caplunar occurs, but the Caplunar has nothing to say about it. Nearly all of these became non-issues with the doctrine of dormancy - that is, I simply ignored the Caplunar - it had nothing to say, so we ignored the chart.
And dormancy is really the only noticeable problem with these charts. It's not alike a major event happens right after a Caplunar and the Caplunar provides opposite symbolism - that is very rare. I do have two examples of that in front of me - and both are "problem events" in other respects. One is Pres. Harding's death (a story in its own right, where the universe, from almost any angle, seemed to be saying it was a happy event!), and the Ludlow massacre. But these are rare.
The usual problem was that the Caplunar would occur and say nothing. Ignoring a "silent" or "dormant" chart solved that problem.
But it left me wondering...
If "flow-through" worked with a dormant Capsolar, did it also work with a dormant Caplunar?
Preliminary (I repeat, preliminary!) checking suggests... grumble!... that it does.
Flow-through on Dormant Caplunars
If we take literally (rather than just figuratively) that we are to treat a dormant Caplunar as if it isn't even there, does that mean that the prior ingress is still operative? Bradley did think, after all, that they each had a life of their own. Is this what distinguishes whether one of the minor charts seems to continue "working" past its week?
I have 5 examples in front of me where the "chart of the week" was the Caplunar, and it was dormant. I decided to check the Liblunar right before (unless it, too, was dormant) and see if it described the event. Here is what I found...
1. JFK Assasination. Bingo! Prior Liblunar had Saturn rising (2°), 18' from square Neptune. (For Washington, Pluto was exactly setting - a Jupiter-Pluto opposition across the horizon.)
2. Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire. Bingo! Prior Liblunar had a Mars-Uranus conjunction straddling the Ascendant, Uranus 0°37' above, Mars 2°20' below, their midpoint within a degree of the Ascendant.
3. Reagan shot. Bingo! The Liblunar Ascendant closely squared an opposition of Jupiter-Saturn to Sun-Mars - everything necessary do describe an attempt to kill the President (Sun + malefics) that failed (Jupiter). All the planets' positions averaged 10°17' Gemini, or 15' from the Ascendant.
4. Friendship Theater Fire. No cookie! Venus exactly rising. (No, no, no, "Friendship" in the name doesn't make this a hit <g>.)
5. Ycua Bolanos market fire. The prior Liblunar also was dormant. Rolling back to the prior Canlunar, we get at least half a bingo: Exactly rising was a 0°23' Sun-Moon conjunction. (Sun-Moon conjunctions and oppositions have an extraordinarily high frequency in ingresses for major fires.) The only other foreground planet was Saturn, though it was a bit wide.
So there you have some samples. Mostly damn good, not perfect. Enough to show that maybe... just maybe... there is something to examine here.
I'm interested in examples known to others and, secondarily, any thoughts on this.
), does the Salvation negate Hellfire entirely, or during a certain period of time during the Caplunar (like its first week), or does it force the Hellfire to manifest before the Caplunar's Salvation?