"Primary" angles

[Jim Eshelman]

(Dec 13, 2014)

Because of a remark I made in another thread recently, I want to write a bit about where my thinking is going concerning progressed natal angles.

Of course the quotidian rate is valid - that's the real "secondary progressed" rate. But there also has always seemed to be a valid rate of approximately 1° on the Midheaven. These aren't necessarily the Primary Direction angles, but I call them the "Primary angles" (angles by Primary rate) because it is approximately true, and it gives us a convenient label.

They are what Tropical astrologers generally call, simply, "the progressed angles."

There are two main theories (and several lesser theories) about how to calculate these angles. One is the Solar Arc rate (the Midheaven moves at exactly the same pace as secondary progressed Sun, and the other angles are calculated from that). The other is the Naibod rate (the Sun's average, rather than actual, daily rate). Either of these in theory could be measured in longitude or in RA but, in general, the forms to seriously consider are (1) Solar Arc rate on MC measured in longitude and (2) Naibod rate on MC measured in Right Ascension.

Let's call these P1-S and P1-N (for Primary progressed rate, SA or Naibod).

For almost my entire astrological life, I've used Naibod in RA rate (P1-N). I've seen some really good examples and, when I did a couple of studies of 20 or so well-timed events, it seemed to come out better than the P1-S rate. It always bothered me, though, that there were so few examples: Not just because I checked about 20 charts at a time, but because only a few of them actually had any non-quotidian progressed angle contact to natal or progressed planets. This conclusion seemed solid enough from the few outstanding examples, but as a rare occurrence.

I was a little disturbed to find that, in the same test charts, the Tertiary Progressions performed better timing angles by the Solar Arc MC rate, not the mean (Naibod) rate. I settled by deciding that I'd used what proved itself even if I didn't have a good theory on it.

Let me hasten to add that Solar Arcs are, by themselves, very powerful. (I have several key ones going on this current half-year that make that point, and I've seen the point show over the years.) One could be distressed that using Solar Arcs by themselves and using Naibod rate for Secondary Progressions seems contradictory, like two different needles slipping to the same planets; but that confusion is no worse than the fact that Solar Arc Ascendant is not the same as the Ascendant derived from using the Solar Arc rate for Primary Angles. (Don't sweat it if this isn't obvious. It's just a side observation.)

Over the last year or two, some things have happened to shake my confidence in Primary Angles as I've been calculating them.

[Jim Eshelman]

I rarely had cause to do much validating these Primary Angles as I've always calculated them, because they don't happen very often. Very few significant events I might study would ever have a contact.

But here's what started really shaking my confidence: Transits to P1-N angles are worthless. Worthless! I watched them in my own chart, day in and day out, for years and essentially never had a noteworthy effect.

But... are transits to progressions valid, like the theory? The same day-in-and-out monitoring has shown me, with no doubt, that transits to progressed Sun and Moon are just as strong and important as to natal Sun and Moon, while transits to progressed planets are of lesser validity - sometimes squarely a hit, sometimes overwhelmed by stronger transits of the day (transits to the natal or SSR). So, if transits to the progressed luminaries are solid, and transits to progressed non-luminaries are at least weakly discernible (and sometimes strongly discernible), one would think that the progressed angles are pretty strong targets, right? But they aren't. I eventually stopped calculating them (I delete them from my monthly lists - they genuinely behave like they just aren't there, so I think they just aren't there).

One could theorize that there is some reason they work for progressions but not for transits, but that seems a little far fetched. I began suspecting they aren't really there, but I didn't push the issue.

Suspecting they aren't really there at all opened mental room for suspecting something else is there instead. I kept having opportunities to see other things in motion, so started making mental notes. These started opening up the possibility that the P1-S rate was correct after all.

I'm not saying it is, by the way. I'm just talking about the possibility.

My own chart provides the chance to look at a good example right now. I'm undergoing events that combine three main characteristics: (1) I will be moving from the house I've lived in nearly my entire adult life, looking for a new place in live in the immediate future. (2) Due to natural circumstances, one of the most important and long-standing relationships I have is either ending or undergoing extreme redefinition. (3) These circumstances both will have, as a consequence, my mate and me creating a new life in a new space, significantly different from the life I've lived for a long time.

So... of all the many astrological factors... what do the Primary Angles have to say about this, if anything?

[Jim Eshelman]

I have Venus at 1°53' Scorpio square Pluto at 2°06' Leo. They are in the immediate background at birth, and on my local Los Angeles angles (with Venus being exactly on IC).

At the very least, this aspect was going to be in the forefront of the current half-year. My Solar Arc MC hit 2° Leo (square the Venus in August, conjunct Pluto in November); transiting Pluto (and later Uranus) would semisquare/sesquisquare natal Venus-Pluto; and transiting Saturn would conjoin natal Venus and square natal Pluto in late November. This is all active, regardless.

So take note... MC conjunct natal Pluto and MC square natal Venus would be present regardless, just because of the Solar Arcs.

By the Naibod rate, my Primary Angles (P1-N) for yesterday when these events came to a head were MC 28°20' Cancer, Asc 18°55' Libra. Nothing natal or progressed within a degree of them. (Nothing to local progressed angles either.)

But by P1-S rate - calculating the MC by Solar Arc, and then calculating the Ascendant that goes with that MC - we get the following. (Don't forget to add the natal planets in.)

p. MC 2°11' Leo
p. Pluto 2°39' Leo

p. Venus 20°49' Libra
p. Ascendant 21°49' Libra
p. Saturn 21°59' Libra

That's... about as descriptive as one can be about the stuff going on!

Doing the same for residence is less dramatic, but does show something of my emotional state, of a rare cycle of drama stirring in my life.

r. Neptune 1°20' Libra
p. MC 1°57' Cancer

p. Mars 28°55' Sagittarius
p. Asc 29°26' Virgo

Now, this is just one case. It's not the only one I've seen, but it was the one closest at hand.

It's also of some increasing personal interest whether either or these rates is correct because of this Pluto and Saturn on the angles. By Naibod rate, this comes to the angles around 2017-2018 (going from memory), the same year that my Solar Return jumps from it's neutral-to-great pattern to have Saturn and Pluto exactly on the SSR angles. A double Saturn-Pluto major whammy... I'd actually assumed that almost exactly the same thing that is happening now would happen then, though adding the death of the friend I mentioned (who has picked about 2018 as when she thinks she'll die), and maybe a serious blow to my health. Tough time. Looked like the major karmic convergence of Solunars and progressions to hit me hard. I accepted it as simply the timing of normal life events that we all know are inevitable.

But that picture changes if the progressed angles are actually making those contacts this year, not later. (In fact, to offset the SSR a bit, P1-S rate puts progressed Jupiter exactly conjunct MC for the last half of 2017, and a progressed Moon-Jupiter conjunction there around April 1, 2018. Very different picture.)

This is just the personal motivation bringing this to a head for me right now. But, since I'd made some remark about it, it seemed the right time to write something more extensive about my evolving thoughts.

At present, I remain agnostic and intrigued. I suppose I should start tracking day-to-day transits to the P1-S angles to see if they are any more responsive to transit than the P1-N angles.

And I invite all of you to look at both and share examples.

[Jim Eshelman]

To give some examples of my personal life... first, it doesn't prove anything to show that P1-S progressed Midheaven contacts are valid, since this is simply Solar Arc Midheaven. But, for the record, I'll observe:

p. MC sq r. Sun 8/75. "New kid in town," newly in California per se, a bit of a celebrity.

p. MC op. r. Mars 1/82. Vague: Middle of my two years at Astro Computing. I could make a case.

p. MC sq. r. Neptune 6/84. Involved in a stack of Neptune things right exactly then, too numerous to list.

p. MC conj. r. Uranus 6/86, r. Jupiter 9/86. The prior summer (in orb), I was one of three people being considered as practical and ceremonial head of an international organization. I didn't want the main position, and maneuvered things so that I was number 2, had a significant leap in status. Concurrently a significant leap in income from another matter, through '86.

p. MC sq. r. Saturn 12/97. A couple of months earlier (well within orb) I broke my heal, and this is the middle of the time I was flat on my back convalescing and looking at shutting down my 10-year business.

p. MC sq. r. Mercury 4/2000. Wrote a critical book that remains a modest best seller. Among other things, was doing temp work during this time with all its business and particular tasks: I was inside more offices that year than any other time of my life.

And then this year's Venus and Pluto. That's the MC which I knew would work. How about P1-S progressed Ascendant, though?

p. Asc conj. r. Sun 5/78. This isn't as clean a hit as I might want to see. '79 would have been much better; but, during this whole time of about three years there was a LOT of solar stuff. Natal Sun was hitting my SSR angles and Pluto was conjoining it.

p. Asc sq. r. Mars 2/86. See what I said about '86 above. Mars adds in to indicate the amount of energy and the political and other conflicts of the time, competition issues, and more.

p. Asc sq. r. Uranus 7/91, r. Jupiter 11/91. I'd gone public with a new spiritual organization in '89, and it had been growing. 1991 was busy in its building, and the last half had be involved in forming a new professional organization to defend certain rights in our profession and specifically push for the overturning of a recent law. We got a significant amount of what we wanted by pushing it uphill to the appellate level.

p. Asc conj. r. Saturn 2/06. Not entirely clear about the time for something as big as this progression; but, generally, changes in my place of employment led to tougher conditions and I found an opportunity to leave for more money. This got delayed until the aspect was essentially out of orb, so there were various "I'm over this, heading eventually for the Exit sign" conditions, along with some positive things.

p. Asc conj. r. Mercury 2/09. Started a run of three years writing some of my most significant stuff. Was also well situated professionally in a Mercury profession.

Not perfect, but pretty good.

[Jim Eshelman]

Now let's repeat that (before I have to run out the door in a few minutes) with Naibod rate progressions.

First, progressed Midheaven to natal planets. Briefly, since I'm short of time:

r. Sun 7/77. TNIA came out, so that deserves some recognition of this.

r. Mars 7/84. Could be seen as an ambitious lead-in to the '85-'86 events I described, but not really on the mark in time or character.

r. Neptune 2/87. Nothing comes to mind.

r. Uranus 4/89, r. Jupiter 7/89. Best hit of the bunch: Launched a new spiritual organization 3/89.

r. Saturn 6/01. A place I'd worked had closed months earlier and I was living sparsely, but it was hardly the most difficult time of these several years between closing my law practice and getting back to work in a new field.

r. Mercury 11/3. A lot happened in late '03 and early '04, but none of it really has much to do with Mercury.

I could draw some positive conclusions from some of these but, overall, this is a poor showing except for an event or two.


Next, aspects of P1-N progressed Ascendant to natal planets:

r. Sun 8/80. A case could be made, and hard to filter out (see Sun under the other system) but, in general, 1980 was unsolar: isolated most of the year doing an anonymous project for Mattel.

r. Mars 12/88. Nothing comes to mind.

r. Neptune 2/92. A little lost - but only a little - since the law changes I'd mentioned had come into play, and I'd started eying an eventual wind-down of my law practice.

r. Uranus 9/94, r. Jupiter 1/95. Nothing comes to mind.

r. Saturn 10/09. It was a hard year for everybody, and my income dropped a lot; but I also had lots of other Saturn going. Seemed a perfect fit at the time, but I'd read the charts the same way without it.

r. Mercury 11/12. During this whole stretch of years I'd been writing more aggressively. Hard to filter this one period out from times around it.

Overall, these are poor and minimal.

[Jim Eshelman]

So, where you have mostly leaned toward the P1-N angles, your life is now proving to you the P1-S angles offers better hits—now you want to start testing transits to the P1-S rate angles, since you have already proven to yourself transits to the P1-N are worthless. Do I understand this correctly?

[Jim Eshelman]

Yes. Except I wouldn't yet use the word "prove." I remain agnostic, undecided.

[Jim Eshelman]

Your Solar Arc birth MC partile cnj your p. Pluto partile 90 your r. Venus partile cnj your local IC. I see this as the same principle as your teachings where you state:

Partile aspects reign supreme. It is when angularity and aspect partility coincide that outstanding incidents are most likely to come about.

And, we see an outstanding Venus-Pluto incident happening in your life.

Jim, correct me if I am wrong with my thinking or words:

Both the progressed Naibod in RA rate and Solar Arc rate for out Natal Angles are very important for monitoring in our life when the criteria is met with your above quoted words. This criteria will be a rare occurrence in a normal life span involving the above progressed natal angles.

[Jim Eshelman]

Both the progressed Naibod in RA rate and Solar Arc rate for out Natal Angles are very important for monitoring in our life when the criteria is met with your above quoted words. This criteria will be a rare occurrence in a normal life span involving the above progressed natal angles.

I don't know that this is true. It's possible, but would seem very strange in the order of things.

But, of course, we live with strange things all the time

I suggest we simply find different ways to examine this. I'm opening the discussion (opening it to empirical observation) of what is so.

[Jim Eshelman]

SteveS wrote:

Both the progressed Naibod in RA rate and Solar Arc rate for out Natal Angles are very important for monitoring in our life when the criteria is met with your above quoted words. This criteria will be a rare occurrence in a normal life span involving the above progressed natal angles.

Jim responded:

I don't know that this is true. It's possible, but would seem very strange in the order of things.

It has been my astrological experience with Naibod progressed angles partile conjuncting or 180 radical planets or progressed radical planets-- time (to a year) major life cycles-- either with major events and/or major psychological changes. But, I have only witness this a few times with close people in my life; I deem these type time cycles rare but am only going by my experience. I have no experience with the Solar Arc angles, but for damn sure your Solar Arc MC on p. Pluto partile aspecting r. Venus is timing a major life cycle for you.

Jim wrote:

I suggest we simply find different ways to examine this. I'm opening the discussion (opening it to empirical observation) of what is so.

Yes, my thoughts are the same. We could set up Solar Arc & Naibod files in SF where we and/or members could examine this procedure with only the conjunction & 180 for anyone’s life. I may be wrong, but a generated list should show very few hits, if any, in a life time, using your above quoted teaching words for ‘outstanding incidents.’

[Jim Eshelman]

For those who have Solar Fire, I am going to write the SF instruction for seeing the important Venus-Pluto cycle firing-off in Jim’s life pertaining to progressed primary Natal angles. In this case it is Jim’s Solar Arc MC which is the main progressed angle timing mechanism, not the standard Naibod RA progressed natal angles. Jim, correct me if I use any misleading words.

1: Compute Jim’s Natal: Oct 10th 1954, 4:13 AM CST, Rochester Indiana, 41N03:53 086W12:57.

* Note Jim’s partile Venus-Pluto 90. In 1975 Jim moved to LA (Oakwood, Ca). When we relocate his Natal Chart to Oakwood, a very important change occurred. His Natal Venus (01,53 Scorpio) landed on his re-located IC (01,39 Scorpio). Also his Natal Pluto (02,06 Leo) landed partile 90 his relocated MC (01,39 Tau). I don’t know if Jim consciously chose this new location, but I can guarantee, not knowing any details, this relocation dramatically altered his personal life relationships.

Now, Jim has seen a major life altering situation with a close relationship (I don’t know what type—it’s private) that is affecting his life in a Plutonian manner. His Natal birth MC has now progressed to 2,11 Leo by Solar Arc rate, partile cnj his Natal Pluto and standard secondary progressed Quotidian Pluto (2,39 Leo) and his Natal Pluto (02,06 Leo).

SF instruction for computing Jim Solar Arc r. MC:

2: With Jim’s Natal Chart highlighted at Rochester, click on ‘Chart’ in upper left hand corner. Scroll down and click on Tran/Prog/Dirn. Under the ‘Chart Type to Generate’ box you will notice SF is defaulted to ‘Secondary Progressed.’ You must change this by clicking on ‘Solar Arc Directed’ and then click OK for new calculated chart and note his Solar Arc Directed MC is 02,11 Leo.

For those who are interested you can check your Solar Arc MC for any possible partile 0,90,180 hits to natal or progressed planets. Got to take care of some business--later.

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim, this thread has provoked deep pondering within my mind on certain issues I have long suspected as being true as far as answering the question: Which progressed natal angle rate we should select as being the correct rate? My answer to this question is its possible we need to focus on one particular p. angle when we see the following criteria occur with our individual chart angles, which is basically allowed by core principles from your teachings.

Basic criteria:
For sure, when we see partile planetary conjunctions or oppositions on our individual chart angles involved with partile aspects of the 0,90,180, then ‘outstanding incidents’ in our life are going to manifest. This is based on your teachings and imo is the most consistent working astrological principle I have discovered in my astrological life pertaining to ‘outstanding incidents’ in our lives.

This core criteria involves being able to see with our eyes many different charts which have proven to TIME ‘outstanding events,’ just as the important event(s) that is now manifesting in your life with the main charts you are observing in this thread. I have long maintained with my beliefs the correct astrological program has not yet been invented for the Siderealist to quickly see what needs to be seen with fore knowledge. There can be technical improvements with today’s technologies for the Siderealist.

But we Siderealists clearly understand that Nature (God) is geometrizing our lives with the natural law of astronomy through our individual chart angles, with the intrinsic meanings of the planets based on an accurate birth time pertaining to certain progressed rates of our angles.

It is clear to me, in your life at this moment, the Solar Arc rate through your Natal Progressed angles is the main chart that is accurately timing a major event in your life.

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim, have you described somewhere HOW your life changed dramatically? Meeting the love of your life? I guess there must be a thread about this relocation somewhere, might be relevant to connect to it here.

Meeting all the loves of my life (well, except one). Venus literally went from a background matter in my life to a foreground matter in my life. I never dated in high school or had any significant human connection for that matter. Venus in the immediate background, in its detriment, overall well aspected by 13' from square Pluto, opposite Algol... a pretty messed up Venus.

That area of life opened up more when I went to college and, among other things, met the woman I married. Our relationship lasted two years, and our marriage lasted two years, but those two don't entirely overlap <g>. BTW, we're still in touch and have a really good correspondence relationship, but I haven't actually seen her in decades. In any case, moving to California in 1975 unleashed a side of me that probably nobody who knew me in high school would have suspected.

And not just in Venus matters. Coming to where Pluto was angular was meaningful on its own, but also meant I came to a place where every year - every single year - transiting Pluto is on an angle of my Solar Return, usually within 2°. Read the standard interpretation of transiting Pluto on a Solar Return angle - it's been my life every year since 1975.

[Jim Eshelman]

thanks, Steve

so far in my life, there have been only a few contacts of progressed MC with rx or pr planets; listing them for both progression rates (months for exact hits):

Naibod in RA

p MC conj. r PL Nov.2010.
in Nov 2010 there was no significant happening regarding my work or career, or my place/status in society in general - nothing whatsoever of that kind; I was undergoing a process of emotional transformation, which was "cooking" inside me trough that winter and finally climaxing in spring 2011.
--- this is a total miss

p MC conj. r SA Oct.2013.
Oct 2013. was very Jovial for me, in various life-areas: came back from my first longer visit abroad in August, with more money, new computer and overall enriched by the new experience; during last days of that August I learned to decoupage, and in September I learned to ride bicycle for the first time in my life; October was marked by intense engagement with decoupage works, my attention focused to art & beauty, outer life-circumstances smooth & jolly.
--- another total miss

p MC opp. r SU Nov. 2014.
this is still operating, so I will not rush into definite conclusion; my current life-circumstances are markedly Saturnian, but Saturn is on the SSR Asc; nothing prominently Solar thus far, in any case.

Solar Arch in Long.

p MC conj. r PL July 2013.
seems very fitting. in July decided to permanently relocate to USA (as a long-term plan) & slowly begun to search for options&information regarding this; in late August learned to decoupage, which some time afterwards became obvious as a career turning-point event (I was thinking of myself as a philosophy teacher career-wise thus far; but during the autumn and winter of 2013. it slowly became clear that Art is what I should really be doing)

p MC conj. p SA - happening right now
current financial & material circumstances very harsh; I'm working incessantly without loss of enthusiasm toward making them better (seeing the circumstances as a test in endurance & persistence)

p MC will be conj. p SA in Sept 2016., and opp. p Sun in Oct 2017. --> this remains to be seen

----------------------

overall conclusion:
S.A. in Long shows as much much better than Naibod in RA

(will look at my husbands chart later and post the findings)

[Jim Eshelman]

Thanks Danica, this is the type feedback we need. What peaks my interest is to research as much as possible when the criteria for Jim's teachings for 'outstanding incidents' occurs with p. angles where Jim says:

Partile aspects reign supreme. It is when angularily and aspect partility coincide that outstanding incidents are most likely to come about.

The above criteria is exactly what is happening in Jim's life now with his Natal partile 90 of Venus-Pluto being activated by p. SA MC. I am getting ready to look at my life with the above criteria with p angles and see if any of these cycles has occurred in my life--will post later.

[Jim Eshelman]

I think everyone on this forum who is interested in this thread should SEE (a picture is worth a 1000 words) what is happening in Jim’s life from a Sidereal Astrology standpoint along with Solar Arc progressed natal angles. I have looked at many progressed Natal Charts in my life but never have I seen one this dynamic. It’s a classic once in a lifetime progressed natal cycle for Jim.

[Jim Eshelman]

I have a series of pet "test events" for predictive techniques. I'm going to use this post to list any of them where either set of proposed "primary" angles has a hit to natal or progressed planets within 1° and to compare the results. I will say in advance that, thumbing through these, I do some Ascendant "hits" or great interest, and I do see some key contacts of the SA MC to the secondary progressed planets - which wouldn't be there or valid if the MC was simply a Solar Arc direction. So this should be interesting.

I won't list every event in my test set - only those that have a "hit" of the angles to at least one of these systems. (Not every event will show a hit to the progressed angles. I'm only interested in those that do.) In all cases, only birthplace angles are tested (to reduce the variables).

JOHN LENNON - murder
P1-S Asc 1°49' Gemini
p. Neptune 2°07' Virgo

CONCLUSION: Only P1-S showed. and it was an ASC contact. A solid vote for P1-S.

ALEISTER CROWLEY - received The Book of the Law
P1-S IC 20°15' Libra
p. Jupiter 20°20' Libra
r. Mercury 20°21' Libra
P1-N IC 21°10' Libra

CONCLUSION: A tie.

JAMES FORRESTAL - suicide
P1-S Asc 12°25' Leo
r. Neptune 13°01' Taurus
P1-N Asc 13°23' Leo
p. Neptune 13°54' Taurus
r. Pluto 13°39' Taurus

CONCLUSION: Close to a tie, but P1-N has a slight advantage due to Pluto's inclusion.

JAMES ESHELMAN - leaving Indiana, moving to Los Angeles
P1-S MC 22°18' Gemini
r. Sun 22°28' Virgo

CONCLUSION: By this simple test, appears to favor P1-S; but (going outside the definition of the study), P1-N EP was within a degree of natal Sun, so it's not so solid a vote.

JAMES ESHELMAN - "King & Lockhart" night
r. Sun 22°28' Virgo
P1-S MC 22°46' Gemini

CONCLUSION: Favors P1-S. (P1-N EP had moved out of orb.)

JAMES ESHELMAN - a critical illumination event
P1-N Asc 28°08' Virgo
r. Mars 28°55' Sagittarius
P1-S MC 4°51' Cancer
p. Jupiter 5°48' Cancer

P1-S Asc 0°25' Libra
r. Neptune 1°20' Libra
P1-N MC 2°04' Cancer
p. Neptune 2°33' Neptune

CONCLUSION: P1-S is solidly the better descriptor. 'N' misses the Jupiter elements (the event was an anointing, an appointment, and had what would usually be called religious characteristics). 'N' adds Mars which doesn't apply at all, and doubles up on the Neptune. Mars+Neptune doesn't fit, Jupiter+Neptune does.

JAMES ESHELMAN - lineage head enthronement
r. Mercury 17°20' Libra
P1-N MC 18°07' Cancer
p. Saturn 20°51' Libra
p. Venus 21°27' Libra
P1-S MC 21°46' Cancer

CONCLUSION: 'N' shows a Mercury event, which it was not. 'S' shows responsibility trumped (smaller orb) by joy, for an event arising out of the death of my teacher of 25 years and my taking up the role of successor. Solid for 'S'.

DONALD BRADLEY - death
P1-S IC 11°08' Cancer
p. Mars 11°17' Cancer

P1-N Asc 0°45' Taurus
r. sun 1°14' Taurus

CONCLUSION: 'S' has p. Mars on the angle within a few minutes for a painful end after multiple surgeries. 'N' shows vitality and life. Easily, 'S' wins.

MARCEL CERDAN - death
P1-N IC 9°02' Gemini
r. Venus 9°46' Gemini
r. Pluto 9°54' Gemini
P1-S IC 10°29' Gemini
p. Pluto 10°32' Gemini
P1-N Asc 10°53' Pisces

CONCLUSION: Almost a tie; and, for an even-hour birth time, I'll call this an out-and-out tie.

CARL ERSKINE - pitched 1st televised no hitter
P1-N MC 1°35' Sagittarius
r. Uranus 1°50' Pisces
p. Uranus 2°24' Pisces
r. Venus 2°35' Sagittarius
P1-S Asc 2°46' Pisces

CONCLUSION: 'S' wins. Both play up the Uranus, but 'S' has double Uranus plus the joyous Venus.

JOHN KENNEDY = murder
r. Uranus 0°08' Aquarius
P1-S Asc 0°31' Scorpio

r. Sun 14°15' Taurus
P1-S MC 14°33' Leo
p. Moon 15°22' Taurus
P1-N MC 16°19' Leo

CONCLUSION: 'S' wins. The Uranus and Sun tell the story, and aren't in the picture with 'N.'

MATTHEW QUELLAS -significant auto accident
r. Moon 28°41' Gemini
P1-S Asc 29°14' Pisces
r. Mars 29°15' Pisces

P1-S MC 18°19' Sagittarius
p. Mercury 19°05' Virgo

CONCLUSION: 'S' nails it, 'N' doesn't even participate. ASC involvement and 0°01' contact with progressed Mars shows this is not a simple SA artifact: it behaves as part of the secondary progression system.

ELECTROCUTION VICTIM - struck by lightning
P1-S MC 16°02' Sagittarius
p. Neptune 16°29' Virgo
r. Neptune 17°00' Virgo

CONCLUSION: Only 'S' is in the picture. (Its symbolism is adequate but not spectacular. There was long convalescence following.)

POLICEMAN'S WIFE - he was murdered on the job
P1-N MC 4°53' Cancer
r. Pluto 5°22' Cancer
P1-S MC 5°43' Cancer
p. Pluto 6°03' Cancer

CONCLUSION: Either is adequate, but 'S' wins: It not only has both Plutos, but p. MC is 0°00' from their midpoint!

POLICEMAN - murdered on the job
r. Venus 21°16' Gemini
P1-N Asc 21°32' Virgo

p. Moon 23°44' Sagittarius
P1-N IC 23°46' Sagittarius

CONCLUSION: Only 'N' has anything to say, and the symbolism is all wrong. Even if this isn't a vote for 'S,' it's a clear vote against 'N.'

MARGARET EDEN - killed by train
P1-S Dsc 22°33' Aries
P1-N Dsc 22°47' Aries
p. Mars 23°20' Aries

P1-N MC 29°37' Cancer
r. Sun 0°21' Leo

CONCLUSION: 'N' adds Sun, a vote for life, not death. While it did give her some notoriety in death that she never had in life, this seems wrong symbolism. I minor negative score to 'N.'

RALPH EDWARDS - his home burned down
P1-N Uranus 12°53' Capricorn
r. Uranus 13°37' Capricorn
P1-S MC 14°14' Capricorn
p. Moon 14°27' Aries
r. Venus 14°29' Venus

P1-N Asc 5°33' Taurus
r. Mars 4°42' Taurus

CONCLUSION: A solid, unequivocal hit for 'N' - the only one we've seen (and this IS an even-hour birth time).

[Jim Eshelman]

To summarize the results, excluding the events that were a complete tie and giving one full point for a clear winner in each case:

JOHN LENNON - murder S +1.0
JAMES FORRESTAL - suicide N +0.25 (i.e., slight advantage)
JAMES ESHELMAN - "King & Lockhart" night S +1.0
JAMES ESHELMAN - a critical illumination event S +1.0
JAMES ESHELMAN - lineage head enthronement S +1.0
DONALD BRADLEY - death S +1.0
CARL ERSKINE - pitched 1st televised no hitter S +1.0
JOHN KENNEDY = murder S +1.0
MATTHEW QUELLAS -significant auto accident S +1.0
ELECTROCUTION VICTIM - struck by lightning S +0.75
POLICEMAN'S WIFE - he was murdered on the job S +1.0
POLICEMAN - murdered on the job N -1.0
MARGARET EDEN - killed by train N -0.5
RALPH EDWARDS - his home burned down N +1.0

You can see the results at a glance - one clear hit for N and a barrage of events where S is better. Also, some events actually had bad enough symbolism for N that it took points away. If we add this all up, it gives

S +9.75
N -0.25

Based upon these test events - which generally serve me well to get an overview of the operability and relative strengths of a predictive technique - progressing the non-Quotidian "secondary" angles at the SA in Long rate is a valid, strong technique, and progressing it by the Naibod in RA rate is worse than if it were simply neutral, i.e., it produced more erroneous results than correct ones.

[Arena]

Jim, is this method progressions, or primary directions in RA and using true time instead of mean time?

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/pran.html

The mistake made by Davison and some others involved keeping the Sun and the MC at a constant distance in longitude. This is incorrect because the Sun-MC arc is supposed to be measuring the time of the chart, and only right ascension does this.

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim, is this method progressions, or primary directions in RA and using true time instead of mean time?

If the planets are actually moving through their real zodiacal motions (at some scaled pace), then I would call it a form of progressions. If this natural motion isn't occurring and the planets are only rotating or moving at a common, shared pace, then I would call it a form of directions.

(But maybe I didn't understand the question?)

[Arena]

The article in the link argues that the progressions or primary directions need to be done in RA and with real apparent time, not mean time. Do you agree, and is that perhaps what you are doing in this thread?

[Jim Eshelman]

I long agreed in theory until actual performance required me to abandon the theory in lieu of solar arc in longitude, which is what us being demonstrated here.

[Arena]

Ok, I see. The intro in this thread is a bit confusing ... but maybe that is just me as my mind is occupied with all kind of other things apart from astrology.

Well, it seems like I could possibly test this (I think I may have tested this already a long time ago in the other forum and found that the solar arc rate proved better than the naibod progressions in my case). So if I use astro.com for now and use the solar arc feature there, would that be fitting?

Jim said

Solar Arc Ascendant is not the same as the Ascendant derived from using the Solar Arc rate for Primary Angles

..hence my questions.

[Jim Eshelman]

Correct. Solar Arc Ascendant is not the same, but the principle is to make sure that Solar Arc Midheaven is the same.

Since Ascendant and MC do not move at the same rate, advancing MC X° does not mean Ascendant would advance the same distance. The nature of directions is that they aren't based on actual motion but on a uniform advance of all things the same amount; so, for Solar Arc Directions, MC and Asc (and everything else) is advanced the uniform X°. But to get these "primary angles" for Secondary Progressions, you get the SA MC, and then determine what the Ascendant is for that MC.

For example, My local MC is 1°38' Taurus, Asc 5°14' Leo. If I were doing Solar Arc Directions, since my progressed Sun has moved 63°05', everything advances 63°05'. SA MC becomes 4°43' Cancer, SA Asc becomes 8°19' Libra. Asc and MC remain 93°36' apart. But for the primary angles to pair with Secondary Progressions, that 4°43' Cancer MC produces Ascendant 1°52' Libra - the same longitude that occurs at 34N03'46" when the MC is 4°43' Cancer. These angles are 87°09' because they have been progressing at different rates.

[Arena]

Ok, but do you know if the solar arc feature in astro.com would work for this?
I can see that my natal chart has 12,33 degrees between the DSC and the MC and when I cast a solar arc direction chart for today I see that this distance is 13,34 degrees and SA AC is partile conj. n. Mercury which is quite fitting for going back to Uni and maybe the business ventures as well.

PS. Oh wow, I've just been upgraded to be a "sidereal field agent" with over 500 posts (but was demoted from Irish by the move to the new site) ... should I take out my Bond wear and start a mission?

[Jim Eshelman]

Ok, but do you know if the solar arc feature in astro.com would work for this?

I don't know. I've never used Astro.com to calculate charts. Others here probably do know.

The question is whether it is a feature to Solar Arcs per se, or is an option on how to calculate the progressed angles (probably listed as something like "by Solar Arc in longitude").

I can see that my natal chart has 12,33 degrees between the DSC and the MC and when I cast a solar arc direction chart for today I see that this distance is 13,34 degrees and SA AC is partile conj. n. Mercury which is quite fitting for going back to Uni and maybe the business ventures as well.

For your given birth time, your Solar Arc angles today are 6°56' Aquarius and 24°23' Cancer. Your (primary) progressed angles are 6°56' Aquarius and 4°06' Cancer.

Either way, MC is 12' shy (< three mounts) of moving into partile orb of square natal Neptune. Solar Arc Ascendant is in orb of square your natal Moon.

LOL, I picked "Sidereal Field Agent" as a pun on the astrophysical idea that the zodiac is a field. You are now one with the Sidereal Field.

[Arena]

Yes astro.com shows AC at 24.23 Cancer, conj n. Mercury (and sq.n. Moon), which is why I said is quite fitting for me having gone back to Uni to study again.

But if you say by this method it would be 4,06 Cancer instead, well then it is sextile n. Pluto and quinc n. Jupiter and nowhere near to square the Moon which is at 25 Aries.

[Jim Eshelman]

But if you say by this method it would be 4,06 Cancer instead, well then it is sextile n. Pluto and quinc n. Jupiter and nowhere near to square the Moon which is at 25 Aries.

No, I said Solar Arc Ascendant was square your Moon, not progressed Ascendant, which is making no valid contacts.

[SteveS]

Recently, Arena asked if I had ‘proof’ that the birth “primary” progressed angles by Solar Arc are active no matter where we relocate away from birth location. Planetary pictures involving “primary” progresses angles are extremely rare in life (difficult to provide a group of statistical proof), but when they occur they will definitely manifest important life events. Jim has offered an important event in his life proving to him and me that we should not ignore the birth location PS-1 primary angles (Solar Arc in Longitude). Back on the old forum, I produced another classic example that the birth PS-1 angles should not be ignored pertaining to relocation, but I think it got lost in the move to new forum. I will post this example again in Jim’s thread on “Primary” angles.

https://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Cooke,_Sam

Then at the peak of his career, Sam Cooke was tragically killed on 12/11/1964. Though details of the circumstances remain hazy; according to reports he was shot three times by the female manager of a Los Angeles motel who claimed she acted in self-defense. Cooke allegedly raped a 22-year-old woman and then turned to the manager. The death was ruled a justifiable homicide. However, it was rumored that many of the crucial details of the case were buried in deference to Cooke’s second wife and two children who wished no further publicity or scrutiny.

Sam (RIP) was tragically killed in LA on 12/11/64 app. 10:00 PM. Progressing his “Primary” progressed birth angles (PS-1) to his birth location produces the following chart. I think we are all in agreement that this birth location PS-1 calculated par-excellent angular planetary symbolism with Venus-Saturn-Pluto.

https://imgur.com/a/jOJ3y

Sam had been living in LA for years building his great musical career. Below is the same PS-I chart calculated for LA, his relocated residence away from his birth residence.

https://imgur.com/a/r2CU2

The par-excellent symbolism of angular Venus-Saturn-Pluto for this tragic event is not calculated for LA, Sam’s relocated residence from his birth location. Conclusion: When relocating to another re-located residence—do not ignore your PS-1 (Primary) progressed birth angles when there are (rarely)angular planetary pictures.

BTW, there was a partile t. Mars-Pluto cnj in the heavens partile 180 Sam’s Natal Moon at the time of this tragic event.

I will later post other examples of PS-I angles, one for a close business colleague with me understanding exactly what is happening in his immediate business environment.

[Jim Eshelman]

I think something important to understand here goes back to Fagan's early (1944?) article, "The Incidents & Accidents of Astrology" - theme he repeated many times in his subsequent writings. Progressions are incidental to the life, while transits are accidental to it.

That is, progressions show the unfolding of what is inherent to an individual and his or her natal chart, much as a planted seed unfolds into the kind of plant it was always going to become. Transits, however, show interaction with the environment, things accidental to the seed (arising from its interaction with environmental conditions).

This was a really big deal for Fagan - realizing why progressions and transits seemed so different, why one failed sometimes when the other worked. He held to this as a basic principle the rest of his life. Bradley picked it up and readily adopted it. It's an important root principle perhaps not of Sidereal astrology itself, but of the astrologers who founded Sidereal astrology.

And remember, solar and lunar returns are in the "transits" category. This was made clear from the beginning: The article "Incidents & Accidents in Astrology" is the article where Fagan first introduced Sidereal Solar & Lunar Returns.

Personally, I think the principle is entirely sound, though we might improve the language a bit (not a high priority for me). We're fine as long as we stick with incidents/incidental vs. accidents/accidental; when we start explaining these more, we get into that fuzzy space where there is ultimately no separation between psychological phenomena and physical events.

Progressions (including Steve's examples in particular) often have a more "fated" sense. It's not that anything specific is fated, but progressions, being incidental, are showing "the way the life was always going to unfold from when it started," because it is a progressive unlocking of who the person is from the birth chart.

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

Back on the old forum, I produced another classic example that the birth PS-1 angles should not be ignored pertaining to relocation, but I think it got lost in the move to new forum.

Danica moved this thread over from the "old" forum for you: http://solunars.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=602&p=3726
Is that the thread you are talking about?

When we moved threads, the person moving them usually copied the post by quoting the original author, so in that thread, the first post is exactly what you originally wrote, Steve, quoted by Danica. We worked hard to move everybody's stuff as completely as possible.

[Arena]

Progressions (including Steve's examples in particular) often have a more "fated" sense. It's not that anything specific is fated, but progressions, being incidental, are showing "the way the life was always going to unfold from when it started," because it is a progressive unlocking of who the person is from the birth chart.

This is how I've always looked at progressions. I never really looked into progressed relocated angles when I was doing all my relocation work before moving. In that work, I focused on relocating the natal and then upcoming solar returns in order to see what kind of manifestations one might see in each place.
But I never really went into the work to produce a hundred charts to compare the progressions, so I have no proof. Hence my question.

[SteveS]

Yes JSAD, thanks for posting the link Danica posted, a good extension discussion link for this thread.

[SteveS]

The following link is my friend’s PS-1(primary angles--secondary progressed natal planets), with bi-wheel transits (outer wheel). This morning, he had a nasty incident with his business partner’s girlfriend. Cyril Fagan wrote: Transits to progressed planets can be just as important as t. to natal planets.

Note: The partile transit of Mercury-Saturn wired in to his p. Moon/Jup=Sun t-square. His remarks to me were: I was having a good month until that money hungry bitch confronted me about Bob’s estate. This t. of Mercury-Saturn depressed the anger out of him. t. Venus (Woman) partile 90 his natal Mars (anger). Also note p. Uranus on his PS-1 Asc. Jim, if I have miss-represented anything pertaining to your PS-1 post—please correct.

https://imgur.com/a/BYFve

[Arena]

Well, if you care for my input, then I see arguments with looking at tr. Mars.
Tr. Mars is pretty obvious in this case. It is aspecting a few different planets in the progressed chart and touches on Mer-Sat transit as well. T. Mars to pr. Moon+Mer+Sun.

Another interesting point is that tr. Jup is opposite pr. Venus and square Pluto indicating that fateful-love union he is about to have this SSR

[SteveS]

Arena wrote:

Another interesting point is that tr. Jup is opposite pr. Venus and square Pluto indicating that fateful-love union he is about to have this SSR

Or, as the real truth of this Jup-Ve aspect verified by my friend yesterday: His relationship with his mate of years is the best it has been in a long time. But, knowing you with your Moon-Mercury-Mars natal aspect, you will find some debate/argument even if 'that fateful-love union" AT AGE 70 does not manifest with his next SSR. He joked with me when I pointed out all the Venus in his next SSR, he didn't believe some new love interest was going to attempt seduce him at the old age of 70, unless it was for his money, which he said he would see coming a mile away with his experience with the opposite sex relative to his life. But we never know the specifics of what is coming our way with the future.

[SteveS]

Jim, do I remember you stating with your work -- transits on PS-1 angles manifested very little?

[Jim Eshelman]

Yes. Actually, less than very little. Transits to those angles are worthless.

[SteveS]

Thanks

[Jim Eshelman]

After a question on the subject this morning, I want to com back to the above question using a different set of event data.

William McKinley - murdered
P1-S: p MC op. p Uranus 29'
P1-N: p MC op. p Uranus 38'
Win: S +0.5 (closer orb)

Warren G. Harding - died
P1-S: p L MC conj. p Jupiter 44', p L EP op. r Venus 45'
P1-N: p MC sq. pr Pluto 45', sq. r Mars 58'; p L MC sq. p Jupiter 59', p L EP conj. p Neptune 59'
Win: N +1.0

Gus Grissom - burned to death
P1-S: p MC sq. p Saturn 54', sq. p Sun 34' (p Su-Sa op. 30'); p : MC op. r Venus 59', p L Asc conj. p Saturn 26', op. p Sun 04', sq. r Neptune 57'
P1-N: p MC conj. r Neptune 56',conj. r Neptune 44', sq. p Saturn 13', sq. p Sun 17'; p L Asc conj. r Saturn 22', op. p Sun 08'
Win: N +0.25 (closer orbs, no Venus; but even-hour birth time)

Roger Chaffee - burned to death
P1-S: None.
P1-N: p L Asc op. r Moon 44'
Win: N +1.0

Robert F. Kennedy - murdered
P1-S: None.
P1-N: p L MC op. r Pluto 00', p Pluto 47', conj. r Venus 33'
Win: N +1.0

Richard Speck - murders
P1-S: p MC sq. p Mars 27'
P1-N: p EP op. p Mars 54'; p L MC sq. p Mrs 01'
Win: N +1.0 (orb & duplication)

Richard Nixon - resignation
P1-S: None.
P1-N: None.

Neil Armstrong - Moon landing
P1-S: p Asc conj. r Jupiter 08'; p L MC (ape Canaveral) op. p Sun 40'
P1-N: p L Asc op. r Saturn 14', sq. p Mercury 46', Me-Sa sq. 26'; p Asc conj. p Mars 48', p MC op. p Sun 32'
Win: S +2.0

Mohandas Gandhi - murdered
P1-S: p Asc op. p Moon 21'; p L MC sq. r Uranus 12'
P1-N: p MC op. p Neptune 25', sq. p Mars 03' (Ma-Ne 22')
Win: N +2.0

Martin Luther King - murdered
P1-S: p MC op. p Moon 46' (p Asc conj. p Mars 95', op. r Saturn 82', p Ma op. r Sa 08'); p L Asc conj. r Mars 53'
P1-N: p MC op. r Moon 04'; p Asc conj. p Mars 58', op. r Saturn 45' (Ma-Sa 08'); p L Asc conj. r Mars 18'
Win: N +.25 (closer orbs but even-hour birth time)

Lee Harvey Oswald - JFK murdered
P1-S: p Asc sq. r Saturn 02'
P1-N: None
Win: S +2.0

John Glenn - orbited Earth
P1-S: (p L Asc op. r Mercury 71'), p L Asc conj. r Moon 51'
P1-N: None.
Win: S +0.75 (docked for even-hour birth time)

John F. Kennedy - murdered
P1-S: p MC sq. r Sun 18', sq. p Moon 11' (p Mo-r Sun 07'), p Asc sq. r Uranus 23'; p L MC conj. p Venus 42', p L EP op. r Mars 46'
P1-N: p MC sq. p Moon 57'; p L MC conj. p Venus 20', p EP L op. r Mars 17'
Win: S +1.0

Jim Jones - Jonestown massacre
P1-S: p EP op. p Mars 47'
P1-N: p EP op. p Mars 04'; p L MC op. p Sun43', p L Asc sq. p Mercury 04'
Win: N +0.5 (additional fitting planets but even-hour birth time

James Lovell - orbited Moon
P1-S: p L EP (Cape Canaveral) conj. r Venus 58', r Mercury 45', Me/Ve 07'
P1-N: p EP conj. r Mercury 41'
Win: S +1.0

James A. Garfield - fatally shot
P1-S: p L Asc sq. p Uranus 48', p L EP conj. r Sun 44'
P1-N: (p L MC op. p Uranus 62')
Win: S +0.75 (clearly better but even-hour birth time)

James A. Garfield - died
P1-S: p L Asc sq. r Jupiter 22', p L MC sq. r Sun 56'
P1-N: p MC op. r Jupiter 56'; p L Asc sq. p Uranus 08', p L EP conj. p Sun 15'
Win: N +0.5 (closer orbs but even-hour birth time)

Harvey Milk - murdered
P1-S: None.
P1-N: p L Asc op. p Venus 19'
Win: N -1.0

Gerald Ford - became president
P1-S: p L MC sq. r Jupiter 21', p Asc conj. r Neptune 55'
P1-N: None.
Win: S +2.0

George W. Bush - Bush v. Gore decision
P1-S: p Asc sq. r Uranus 50', p L EP conj. r Mars 46' [exact 9 mo later, i.e., 9/2001!]
P1-N: p Asc sq. r Uranus 0°09'
Win: S +1.0

George Moscone - murdered
P1-S: p Asc conj. r Mars 19'. sq. r Neptune 25', sq. p Neptune 45'; p MC sq. r Moon 57'
P1-N: p Asc conj. r Mars 38', sq. r Neptune 06', sq. p Neptune 26'; p MC sq. r Moon 32'
Win: Tie

Franklin D. Roosevelt
P1-S: p. Asc op. p Neptune 09'; p MC sq. p Jupiter 50'; p L Asc sq. r Sun 46', p L MC sq. p Neptune 20'
P1-N: p Asc op. r Saturn 15', sq. r Sun 45' (Su-Sa 30'); p EP op. p Jupiter 21'; p L Asc op. r Saturn 11', sq. r Venus 12' (Ve-Sa 01')
Win: Tie

Frank Borman - orbited Moon
P1-S: p MC conj. p Neptune 05', r Neptune 45', op. r Venus 08'; p L Asc sq. p Neptune 23', sq. r Venus 10'
P1-N: p MC conj. p Neptune 57'; p L Asc sq. p Neptune 31', sq. r Venus 17'
Win: S +0.75

Princess Elizabeth - wedding
P1-S: p EP conj. r Venus 10'
P1-N: p Asc conj. p Jupiter 09', p EP conj. r Venus 41'
Win: N +1.0

Queen Elizabeth - coronation
P1-S: None.
P1-N: None.
Win: Tie

Queen Elizabeth - eldest son's wedding
P1-S: p Asc conj. r Venus 14'
P1-N: None
Win: S +2.0

Edward White - burned to death
P1-S: p L Asc conj. p Sun 11', p L MC op. r Uranus 10', p Uranus 43', sq. p Saturn 15'
P1-N: p L EP conj. p Saturn 28'
Win: S +1.0

King Edward VIII - abdicated for love
P1-S: p MC op. p Venus 07'
P1-N: None.
Win: S +2.0

King Edward VII - coronation
P1-S: p MC conj. p Jupiter 45', p Venus 54' (p Ve-Ju conj. 08')
P1-N: p MC sq. r Moon 50'
Win: S +2.0

Princess Diana - wedding
P1-S: None.
P1-N: None.
Win: Tie.

Princess Diana - death
P1-S: p EP op. r Uranus 36'; p L Asc conj. p Jupiter 15'
P1-N: p EP op. p Uranus 55', conj. r Moon 14' (Mo-Ur 20'); p L MC sq. r Mars 43', p L EP op. p Uranus 55'
Win: N +2.0

Christa McAuliffe - Challenger explosion
P1-S: None.
P1-N: p MC op. r Sun 51'
Win: N +0.5 (fitting enough but not decisively; and lasted for decades)

Prince Charles - wedding
P1-S: p MC sq. r Pluto 06', p Pluto 06'
P1-N: p MC sq. r Pluto 25', p Pluto 37'
Win: S +0.5 (closer orb)

Charles Whitman - Austin tower shootings
P1-S: None.
P1-N: None.
Win: Tie.

Buzz Aldrin - walked on Moon
P1-S: p EP op. p Saturn 51'; p L Asc (Cape Canaveral) conj. p Pluto 51', op. r Mars 10' (Ma-Pl op. 41')
P1-N: p Asc op. r Sun 16'; p L Asc conj. p Pluto 37', r Pluto 04'; p L MC conj. r Uranus 20'
Win: N +1.0

Al Gore - Bush v. Gore
P1-S: None.
P1-N: None.
Win: Tie.

Abraham Lincoln - murdered
P1-S: p Asc sq. r Sun 23', p. EP op. p Uranus 30'; p L Asc op r Saturn 51'. p Saturn 45'
P1-N: None.
Win: S +2.0

[Jim Eshelman]

SA Long had a few more individual items do better than Naibod RA (17 vs. 13).

The total score for those instances where SA Long did better is +21.25.
The total score for those instances where Naibod RA did better is +11.0.

Again, SA Long is decisively better than Naibod RA.

[Arena]

Arena wrote:

Another interesting point is that tr. Jup is opposite pr. Venus and square Pluto indicating that fateful-love union he is about to have this SSR

Or, as the real truth of this Jup-Ve aspect verified by my friend yesterday: His relationship with his mate of years is the best it has been in a long time. But, knowing you with your Moon-Mercury-Mars natal aspect, you will find some debate/argument even if 'that fateful-love union" AT AGE 70 does not manifest with his next SSR. He joked with me when I pointed out all the Venus in his next SSR, he didn't believe some new love interest was going to attempt seduce him at the old age of 70, unless it was for his money, which he said he would see coming a mile away with his experience with the opposite sex relative to his life. But we never know the specifics of what is coming our way with the future.

Actually I would not have argued that it would have to be a new relationship. If this had been my friend I would have said that it would either be a new fateful and deep experience OR if he was already in a relationship something would occur to make it deeper. Some experience bringing people closer together. Possible a grandchild being born, renewing the marriage or simply being in love and feeling good. Jupiter enhances and expands, also does for what is there already within his Venus.

[SteveS]

Arena wrote:

...OR if he was already in a relationship something would occur to make it deeper.

Let me go back and zero in on this time frame and see if this was the case, I have forgot the context of our discussion.

Arena wrote on in Dec 2017:

Another interesting point is that tr. Jup is opposite pr. Venus and square Pluto indicating that fateful-love union he is about to have this SSR

and then Arena wrote:

OR if he was already in a relationship something would occur to make it deeper.

This could very well have been the case-- but if so it was a private moment in time with his present relationship.

[Jim Eshelman]

Also, in Solar Fire, there is a setting called "Apply Geocentric Correction to Latitude". This makes a very small difference in the calculation, but it could still prove decisive in timing events. I believe I have my own birth chart and a couple of other charts that I work with, rectified to the exact second of birth. Since I have been working on trying to figure out which is more accurate: Solar Arc/Naibod and Longitude/Right Ascension, I am also looking at the geocentric latitude setting.

The question of geocentric vs. geodetic latitude is an old one. The most important thing to know is that the difference is so small that it makes no practical difference in any technique that has been proven to be reliable.

Burt there is a small difference... have I anything else to offer on it?

Donald Bradley and Gary Duncan spent decades trying to get this one right on a scientific basis. Bizarrely, it is one of the hardest things to clarify. Bradley, already an accomplished amateur astronomer (with a large telescope atop his Tucson home), wrote very precise questions to the office of the Nautical Almanac - questions that would have resolved the question - and they couldn't give him a clear answer! (Which is almost beyond belief.) At the end of his life, on a theoretical basis, Don thought geocentric latitude was the one astrologers should use. Gary and I worked through the astronomical definitions as one of the first math problems he gave me for drill when I arrived in California, and it seemed to both of us that the definition of geodetic (what is normally called "geographic latitude" is correct). I still think this.

But I can't say absolutely. I can only say that the difference is so small that confirmed valid astrological technique is likely ever to benefit from knowing the answer.

The question Bradley asked the astronomers who produce the world's most accurate astronomical measurements should have been simple for them to answer IMHO. It was a version of this: If the obliquity of the ecliptic is 23°26'11", is the Sun at the moment of the (northern hemisphere) summer solstice precisely on the zenith at 23°26'11" N geodetic or 23°26'11" N geocentric?

That's the key question. They couldn't answer. My reading of the technical definitions says it's geodetic.

[Jim Eshelman]

Administrator's note: As I promised yesterday, I have purged several posts which had taken this thread quite off topic. I don't want to have to permanently lock the thread in case there are other discussions on the original topic (but it's an old enough thread I might do that). For now, I'll simply ask that everyone remain mindful on every thread to stay substantially on target.

Additionally, some of the posts I removed were wandering off-topic not only to the thread but to the entire site. I'm going to start shutting more of these down and perhaps removing some of them. The site is not a general "anything goes" astrology site for every vagrant astrology theory but, rather, is committed to the astrology brought forward by Cyril Fagan and Donald A. Bradley during their lives and its natural development and unfolding in the decades since their passing. Please see this thread for a non-limiting clarification on what that means: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2259

I may remove this post after a while, since it ALSO interrupts the original thread, but I'll leave it up long enough for everybody involved to see it.

Possibly I have added to confusion by letting off-topic sub-threads meander a bit long, confusing the next person who comes to the thread. There needs to be a little elasticity for normal discussion, I think, and it's sometimes hard to find that line - especially when I'm massively behind on everything and driving with all the strength and time I have to solidly document the full top-to-bottom workings of Sidereal astrology in a book much too far from seeing light of day.