Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Q&A and discussion on Angularity.
Post Reply
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:13 am

I've talked about this subject before... I've slightly evolved my theoretical view... and we don't have enough experimental evidence to say, one way or the other, how conjunctions or oppositions to the Vertex should be calculated.

I found (theoretically) a better way to do it in Solar Fire, and I found an interesting chart to demonstrate - It's the upcoming Canlunar, where I just happened to have Vertex turned on as a display point when I popped it up. I got quite a surprise, so I'll offer it as an example. If you want to follow along, the Canlunar occurs December 15, 2016, 11:49 PM EST, Washington, DC.

First a reminder of what the Vertex is: The Prime Vertical is a great circle that rises due east and sets due west, passing directly overhead and underneath, i.e., through the Zenith and Nadir. The plane of the Prime Vertical is always at right angles to both the plane of the horizon and the plane of the meridian. Where the ecliptic crosses (intersects) the Prime Vertical, we mark the Vertex (on the west side) and the Antivertex (on the east side). If contacts to the Vertex are to be measured mundanely (as with all other angles), the question is how to do this.

#1. Zodiacal Conjunction
Contacts could be taken just by ecliptical longitude. This would be different from the way any other angle works, but I mention it because it's how Vertex contacts have been taken historically, and is at least a possibility. (I allow a maximum 3° orb for Vertex contacts.)

In this case, Neptune is 1°19' from conjunct Vertex in longitude. In contrast, Mars is 10°32' in longitude from Vertex. (Why do I even mention Mars? You'll see soon.)

#2 Azimuth
The way I have been estimating mundane contact with Vertex so far has been realizing that a planet on Vertex or Antivertex if conjunct Prime Vertical, meaning that the planet is on the due east / due west axis. This means it has an azimuth close to 90° or 270°. Solar Fire shows that, in the sample chart, Neptune has an azimuth of 268°47' and - surprise! - Mars has an azimuth of 271°59. Both are close to 270°. In experimentation over the last year or so, it seems that about a 5° variance in azimuth is more or less about where a 3° orb in conjunction falls.

#3 Measure Around the Meridian
This would be the purest way, I think, but we don't have a way of doing it. That is, in the same way that we measure proximity to horizon or meridian along the Prime Vertical (which is at right angles to them), we could measure proximity to the Prime Vertical along the meridian. However, we don't presently have a tool for this.

#4 Prime Vertical Amplitude
I just discovered we have this option. It is the distance above or below (actually, north or south) of the Prime Vertical. It is analogous to altitude above and below the horizon. Now, here's the cute thing: When dealing with bodies that are close to the horizon, altitude is always nearly identical to distance from the horizon along the Prime Vertical! Similarly, PV amplitude, for bodies that are close to the PV, would be very close to (nearly identical to) measuring the distance along the great circle of the meridian as mentioned in #3.

In Solar Fire, under "Harmonics, Transforms & Analogues," we calculate PV longitude (mundoscope positions) using "Z-Analogue Prime Vertical." Immediately under this is "Z-Analogue PV Amp." This is the value we want. Calculating this chart, the Vertex and Antivertex will always show as 0°00' Aries (just as a convention). We see that Neptune is 1°11' on one side of the PV, and Mars is 1°49' on the other side.

I think this is the correct way to calculate distance from the Vertex axis, in the same way that altitude is a valid measurement of distance from the horizon.

Along with all of this, we also learn that planets can look like they're a long way from the Vertex (like Mars 10° away in the sample chart) and actually be very close. Mars is as close to the Prime Vertical circle as Neptune, and that's with not much celestial latitude. This alerts us to a whole new dimension of looking at the Vertex.

I submit that, at this point, we don't know whether contacts to the Vertex axis should be mundane or zodiacal, though every other angle works mundanely and one is, therefore, inclined to start with the assumption that the Vertex works this way too.

I might have to look at this Mars placement on Nova's mapping method to better see, geometrically, what's going on.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:13 am

Here is another way to view the same map. The red circle is the horizon. The green circle is the celestial equator (notice that it follows the path of Earth's equator). The gray circle is the Prime Vertical (notice that it passes through Washington, DC, i.e., the Zenith for Washington; it crosses due east and west, and through the Zenith and Nadir. The black circle is the ecliptic (which is why almost every planet seems to be touching it. Where the green, red, and gray intersect - that is, the equator, horizon, and PV - are the real Eastpoint and Westpoint.

Look at Neptune and Mars. See that they are both just barely off the gray circle. They are, therefore, both barely off the Prime Vertical.

Image
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:14 am

On a more personal note, I've always considered that my Moon is on Vertex, since they are only 1°12' apart in longitude; but that I didn't think it mattered much, since Moon is angular anyway.

But my Moon's azimuth is 274°11' (still within the 5° I estimated might be equivalent to 3° longitude orb), and Moon's PV amplitude is 4°10'. This doesn't seem particularly close (or, rather, about as close as 4°10' from horizon would be, meaning one might count it but not be too excited if something else were closer).

On the other hand...

My Pluto is 24° from my Antivertex. One wouldn't think of them as connected at all. But Pluto's azimuth is 87°13', or 2°47' off of due-90° (due-east). This suggests Pluto is actually close to the Antivertex. Checking PV amplitude, I see that, indeed, Pluto is closer to the Prime Vertical than Moon is, being 2°22' away, which is quite close enough to be excited about.

So, perhaps, I have Pluto on Antivertex at birth.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:14 am

Arena wrote:Well I've been very sure for some time now, about the Vx being an important point in my case and some other up north charts.

How close are those measurements if you cast the Z-Analogue Azi?
I never tried the amplitude measurement.

When I cast my Azi chart, Uranus is the only angular planet.
With a 23.40 birth time, it is within 3, but with 23.23 birth time, it is partile conjunct Vx.

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:14 am

I'd say use 3 degrees.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:15 am

Alexandra wrote:Hi Jim, the above is very interesting. Looking at your chart, what does the PV amplitude show at your current locality?

Has anyone else compared birth their natal to relocated PV amplitude?

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:15 am

Alexandra wrote:Hi Jim, the above is very interesting. Looking at your chart, what does the PV amplitude show at your current locality?
Nothing is on my Vertex axis for locality.

As important a secondary layer as the locality chart is, I think it important to establish something this experimental in terms of the most fundamental, solid factors first - meaning the birth chart itself, since that is with us our entire lives - without adding collateral layers that are so conditional that they vary with time or place.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:15 am

Alexandra wrote:Thanks.
Thought it was interesting using pv amp pluto is on anti-vertex & you moved to a locality where pluto is angular via mundoscope.

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:16 am

This is getting crazy!

I've taken a fresh look at the Vertex for solar and lunar ingresses. I don't have a final opinion on that yet, but I am learning, along the way, just how often planets are "on the Vertex" in the sense discussed here, but are not anywhere close to conjunct it ecliptically. It's quite common. I'm beginning to consider that... just maybe... the times when the Vertex has historically seemed to work might be accidental overlaps with a larger, more important phenomenon, viz., the planets crossing the Prime Vertical.

Consider a Caplunar for January 30, 2003, 9:21:25 PM CST, Houston, TX (covering the month of the space shuttle Columbia disintegration). Aside from the Venus-Saturn-Pluto along the meridian, we have the following. First, longitudes that would not lead you to think anything is on the Vertex. Next, azimuth and (in parentheses) PV amplitude figures that show the planets very close to the Prime Vertical.

Moon 0°00' Cap
Jupiter 18°37' Cancer
Uranus 3°01' Aquarius
Vertex 13°13' Aquarius

These planets don't seem to have anything to do with each other, right? Now see the azimuth...

Vertex 270°00' (0°00')
Uranus 270°33' (-0°29')
Moon 271°43' (-0°50')
Jupiter 92°36' (+1°56')

Yowsa! I'm not sure if these will hold up over time, but this shows a partile (21') Moon-Uranus conjunction on the PV circle. And yet, the planetary longitudes don't show any of the four points having any obvious connection. (I'm not yet endorsing these as being valid in ingresses; there is too little data. The excitement of learning something new is seeing just how often these important-seeming hits occur with no evidence of anything similar in the horoscope. One has to go looking for them.)

I think this deserves attention.

One more thing (and I should have realized this in theory): Planets on the Northpoint and Southpoint (ecliptical square to Vertex, and ecliptical conjunction with the points due north and south on the horizon circle respectively) either always or usually (I don't know yet) also square the Vertex in PV longitude. This makes sense geometrically. For example, in this same ingress,

Vertex 13°13' Aquarius / PV 12°32' in 6th
Mars 14°13' Scorpio / PV 13°32' in 3rd
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:18 am

Arena wrote:Jim, can you simply explain the difference of measuring by Azimuth vs. Amplitude for the Vx?
I've been using Azimuth, and astro.com does offer Azimuth house system, so I can see it there as well.
Do you see a way to have the Amplitude measurement in astro.com?
I think (especially for the tight orbs) that it's nearly always going to be equal. I was surprised in that last lunar ingress example (with the Moon-Uranus) that there was that much difference. I think generally you'll be fine taking a 3° orb from 90° or 270° azimuth.

Here's the thing: They're both probably not the best method, though the PV amplitude is a near-best, and azimuth appears to approximate it in most cases.

I'm going to ask you to do some visualization - a visualization that will help you in most of these things, and you may already have these visualizations in mind, but I'll run through it quickly. Ask questions if unclear.

Imagine a sphere with three circles all the way around it that are at right angles to it. (These circles are called great circles if they contain the center of the sphere as their center. The best example is Earth's equator, which goes all the way around the sphere and has the same center as Earth, right?)

Actually... to make this a little easier... imagine that we are dealing with Earth. One circle is the equator. One is the circle of longitude that is 0/Greenwich on one side and 180 on the other side. The third is the longitude circle that is 90E/90W. Got that? Notice that they are all at right angles to each other.

Now... same visualization except it isn't the Earth and her longitude/latitude, but the celestial sphere. where you previously saw a horizontal circle for the equator, understand that the horizontal circle is really the horizon. The other two (longitude-based, in the visualization above) are the meridian and Prime Vertical. The meridian passes through the points on the horizon that are due north and south. The Prime Vertical passes through the points on the horizon that are due east and west (analogized to the points on Earth's equator where 180E/W and 0 E/W longitude cross the equator). Notice that the meridian and PV intersect each other at the top and bottom - where the North Pole and South Pole would be on a globe. (These points are the Zenith and Nadir.)

Got it?

We normally measure proximity of a planet to the horizon or meridian by measuring along the PV, which is at right angles to them. But let's look closer at the horizon for a moment. A planet's distance above the horizon, in our practice, is measured by drawing a great circle through it that passes through the planet at right angles to the PV (meaning that the great circle also passes through the northpoint and southpoint, where the meridian crosses the horizon). A different way to measure distance above the horizon is altitude, which is the actual angular height of a planet above the horizon - equivalent to bands of latitude on earth. That is, altitude is measured by a great circle through the plant at right angles to the horizon (instead of to the PV), passing through the zenith and nadir. Make sure you are visualizing the difference of the great circle that marks the planet's distance from horizon perpendicular to the PV (PV long), and the great circle that marks its distance from horizon perpendicular to horizon (altitude).

Now, let's switch this to the PV. Our task is: Find how far the planet is away from the Prime Vertical? The answer depends on how we measure it, but the three kinds of measurements usually produce very similar results in the cases that matter (i.e., planets very close to the PV).

PV amplitude is analogous to altitude. It is measured along a great circle perpendicular to the PV, passing through its "poles," which are the NP and SP of the horizon (horizon-meridian intersections). It may help the visualization to think of rotating the sphere 90° so that the Prime Vertical is horizontal like the horizon.

What I think is the best and most correct way to measure this - but we have no tools available to do this for us - is that the distance should be measured along the meridian, which is at right angles to the PV. In this case, we would draw a great circle through the planet at right angles to the meridian circle, passing through the EP and WP (horizon-PV intersections). This is the equivalent of measuring proximity to the horizon in PV longitude, and I suppose we could call it 'meridian longitude" to give it a name.

Now for the complicated one: azimuth. Azimuth measures the planet's place 'around" the horizon. Draw a great circle through the planet, at right angles to the horizon (the same circle we "measured upward" along to calculate altitude), that also passes through the zenith and nadir. (If the horizon is in the place of the equator on an Earth globe, then these are the lines of geographic longitude by an analogy). They walk all around the horizon, being 0° when due north, 90° when due east, 180° when due south, and 270° when due west. Notice that a planet exactly 90°azimuth is due east, so is necessarily on the Prime Vertical - 0°00' off of it - and a planet exactly 270° azimuth is due west, so is necessarily also exactly on the PV - 0°00' off of it.

here's the complexity: As a planet moves off the PV, the rate at which it moves away in azimuth is slightly different from the rate it moves away in PV amplitude - they're viewing from a slightly different angle. Exactly at the horizon, they will be identical, and the farther they are from the horizon, the more change (at the zenith or nadir, the change in amplitude will stay closer to 0° - visualize this). I don't have an exact formula for this, but one could be worked out.

What this means is that - for planets very close to the PV - azimuth is a reasonable way to approximate the PV amplitude, but it isn't the same. We can use it pretty well (I think, being without SF, you should feel free to rely on it), but it is only an approximation. And, while PV amplitude is the best we can do, I don't think it's the correct method either - I think we should be using "meridian longitude," but we don't have a way of doing that right now. The differences between meridian longitude and PV amplitude will be the same range as the differences between PV longitude at the horizon and altitude - quite close if the planet is nearly at the horizon.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:19 am

Arena wrote:I remember you've posted something similar in another thread. Whenever you ask me to visualize things start to spin in my head :D so I just have google images to help me. There are many pictures there to help with the visualization. And some websites as well.

http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/ast122/lectures/lec02.html
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Amer ... Chapter_15
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Amer ... AMPLITUDES

Amplitude seems to be a mix of azimuth and altitude.

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:19 am

I want to give you an update on what I've seen the last few days. Please note that this comes under the heading of inconclusive at this point - it's just some anecdotal observations about what I've discussed above.

As I'm slowly reworking every ingress for every event in Sidereal Mundane Astrology, I'm checking for Vertex contacts except I'm checking for them mundanely - just as with horizon and meridian intersections. One thing I'm finding is that the ecliptical conjunction-opposition with Vertex is only rarely any indication of whether a planet is conjunct it mundanely.

I entered this experiment knowing that how the Vertex works in an individual's natal chart may be quite different from how it works in a mundane chart - different psychological factors involved. I'm mindful that the preliminary study on Vertex in ingresses has shown it to perform so poorly that it almost seems a negation or reversal factor (e.g., most tragic evens tested have a preponderance of Venus and Jupiter contacts to Vx-series, even though they have nearly the least occurrence of angularity for horizon and meridian contacts). I'm ready for the Vx-series to be perfectly valid, but turn out not to be valid in ingresses - that's fine. But the ingresses still provide the best test base because they are the only charts for which accuracy of "birth time" to the minute - event the second! - is always certain.

I'm only including the Vertex-Antivertex contacts and, for now, excluding the Northpoint/Southpoint contacts. These probably operate on a slightly different mathematical model, and I'll come back to them if I find anything of value in this first part.

I'm also looking only in the ingresses, not in quotidians or transits to the solar ingress angles, because all of these are known to work correctly with ecliptical aspects, not mundane - so they're irrelevant to the immediate study.

That's what I've been watching... and here's what I've (casually, anecdotally) seen so far.


First, the fact that a planet is on the Vx-AV is insufficient to take an ingress out of dormancy. Sure, you can find the occasional example that looks impressive, but you can at least as easily find, say, Jupiter on the Vertex for an ugly disaster. The distribution seems random (some of this, some of that), and either doesn't wake from dormancy, or does so and makes the chart wrong. (Except, we still see the prior ingress flowing through, which is would only reliably due if the current one is dormant.)

Second, individual planets on Vx-AV aren't any more impressive. They are at least equally likely to be right as to be wrong, from what I've seen so far.

Third - there is one thing that is starting to excite me, and that may turn out to be a real finding. (Or not. Remember, this is all still preliminary.) It involves a new kind of mundane aspect. Remember, the whole horizon is at right angles to the whole meridian, and both of them are at right angles to the whole Prime Vertical. This means that, if one planet is exactly on the horizon or meridian, and another is exactly on Vx-AV mundanely, they are 90° from each other. So far - no exceptions, so far (which doesn't mean I won't find exceptions later) - such aspects have always been right (i.e., highly characteristic of the event) and often have totally turned the look around.

Until a few minutes ago, the only examples I had seen had involved one planet on PV while another was on horizon or meridian. I just found a different example which was entirely in terms of the PV. It's the New London School explosion. The solar ingresses are absent-to-weak. The only one not dormant is the Arisolar, which has Moon closely on IC, at least reflecting "a children's event." But wait! Mars and Uranus are each only a few minutes from Vertex in mundo. Mars is 0°12' south of the PV, and Uranus is 0°07' north of it. This means they are conjunct within 0°19' in that framework. Mars-Uranus! For an explosion that blew up a school and killed 300 teachers and students! this time, it doesn't tie to a meridian or horizon planet because, though Moon itself is on IC, when we switch to view at right angles to the PV, Moon is 10° away from squaring them. But the Mars-Uranus itself (joined BTW to Sun and Mercury all within 2°) tells the story all by itself.

I've seen several examples so far and, as mentioned above, what strikes me is that they have all been correct - despite the fact that single planets on the Vertex have not been impressive. It takes an aspect - a mundane aspect - to kick this in gear.

Or, so it seems so far.

I'll add a few more quick examples below as I get the chance, but that's the gist of how it looks as of today.

OTHER EXAMPLES:
Cleveland East Ohio gas explosion. The Canlunar was minor, with Sun exactly on MC and a Moon-Sun conjunction. With Pluto 12' from PV, this gives a partile Su -Pluto square exactly on angles, an aspect seen on angles for severe earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, hurricanes and other floods, fires, bombings… all being incidents not far removed from this one.

Clipper Tradewind plane crash. The Canlunar is already quite good enough, with Saturn-Neptune square on the angles. However, with Mercury and Mars each about 1° off the PV. This is interesting by itself, but they also both square Saturn on Descendant. This terms a perfectly lucid chart into a quite spectacular one.

Lac-Megantic train derailment and explosive damage to most of a small down. The Arisolar is already quite good, with Saturn close to IC. However, Pluto is 2° north of the PV, which creates a hidden Saturn-Pluto square that's even better for the large-scale demolition of a town.

For the sinking of the Sewol, the Caplunar is already very good with Mercury and Neptune on IC (Mercury within 1') and a Moon-Mars square. However, add Pluto 7' off PV, and we get an 8' Mercury-Pluto square on angles.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:20 am

Arena wrote:
But wait! Mars and Uranus are each only a few minutes from Vertex in mundo. Mars is 0°12' south of the PV, and Uranus is 0°07' north of it. This means they are conjunct within 0°19' in that framework.
Ok Jim, so to make sure I am understanding you correctly, are you measuring this in mundo, as in Z-analogue Prime Vert in solar fire, like any other mundoscope - so not using the amplitude now?
To get this exact figure (t's slightly different depending on the scenario), firsts flip it to a Horizontal chart - recalculate for the negative co-latitude - and then take the PV mundoscope of that. I only did this after checking the amplitude, which gave me the real proximity to the PV, and in this case wasn't discernibly different.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:21 am

Arena, it occurs to me (after your questions the other day), I should give you the hard numbers for your chart for comparison.

Ecliptically, you have Uranus conjunct Vertex (2°41'):
20°36' Virgo Uranus
23°17' Virgo Vertex

This appears to be confirmed by azimuth: Uranus' azimuth is 272°43', or 2°43' from due west. Nothing else falls close to 90° or 270° azimuth.

Using PV amplitude, your Uranus is 2°42' north of the Prime Vertical.

BTW, in high latitudes (like Iceland), these will behave much better, since it is much like planets on horizon near the equator.

This may not be relevant, since Uranus is foreground anyway - about 7° below Descendant. But I thought you'd like to compare the numbers.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:22 am

Another ingress example that is complex (sorts out pretty well on analysis, but not too clear at the beginning): The Capsolar for the Deepwater Horizon explosion is already quite excellent, with Uranus closely setting and a foreground 9' Saturn-Pluto square. To this, we add the following. Notice that you can't tell these are Vertex-related contacts until you do more looking:

0°42' Cap Venus
20°27' Can Mars
0°09' Aqu Neptune
4°28' Aqu Jupiter
11°10' Aqu Vertex
28°38' Aqu Uranus

Quite a spread, right? They seem to have nothing to do with each other or the Vertex. But observe the azimuth and PV amplitude. (Anything that looks a little wide in one measurement, I'll italicize.)

Venus 275°30' / 2°46' N
Neptune 270°47' / 0°40' N
Jupiter 269°43' / 0°15' S
Uranus 267°33' / 2°27' S
Mars 87°03' / 2°14' N

These are all within 3° of the Prime Vertical itself, and (except for Venus) within 3° of azimuth of being due east and west. If the azimuth is laid out in a mundoscope-like format, we get Mars, Jupiter, Uranus, and Neptune tightly on the east-west axis, with the following aspects:

0°30' Mars-Uranus op.
1°40' Jupiter-Neptune conj.
2°10' Jupiter-Uranus conj.
2°40' Mars-Jupiter op.
3°14' Uranus-Neptune conj.
3°44' Mars-Neptune op.

These aren't bad at all! Some of these aspects would seem quite "off" on their own, but nothing is seriously off in combination. Mars-Uranus is the closest, Jupiter is quite harshly aspected overall. I find it interesting at the very least.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:23 am

Here's an example I can't fail to add to the list. It is almost enough to force an adoption of this approach all by itself (though you all know me better than that <g>). Most of the samples I am finding are already perfectly good charts that either don't need anything else, or are marginally improved by the new aspects. The strongest I've been able to say is that I have yet to find a new aspect by this means that doesn't fit.

Consider, however, the Arisolar for the murder of James A. Garfield: The mundane charts overall describe the event just fine, but, conventionally, the Arisolar is nondescript, with only an angular Mercury (0°17' above Descendant).

However, Mars conjoins Vertex (despite being 8° distant from it in longitude) by being 0°58' north of the Prime Vertical. Even closer, Moon is 0°01' south of the PV, and Uranus 0°41' south. (Moon, especially, doesn't appear in longitude to be anywhere near the Antivertex, and Uranus is 5° off. You can't measure these in longitude, of this I am now sure.)

This produces a Moon-Mars-Uranus triple conjunction within 1°39' where before there was no hint of violence, or even of much activity. Additionally, all three of these planets (Moon, Mars, Uranus) would square the setting Mercury. I have not yet identified a way to calculate exact orbs for PV-to-horizon aspects (which would be best measured along the great circle of the meridian), but the orb will be under 2°.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:24 am

Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:OK, just thinking around.
1) While we don't "need" these contacts to the vertex, they add nuance, at the least. So someday when Mundane Sidereal Astrology forecasts are included in every local news broadcast just like weather reports, these will be handy.

2) When someday comes, instead of using 3 different measurement systems, we just need to get a globe. Mark the MC, ASC, EPT, NP, Vertex, Zenith and so on on the globe, and then we can just mark concentric circles out from the sensitive points, and look at the positions of planets in relation to those concentric circles. We'll call that the Ripple System. Somebody will try to find meaning at the points where the ripples cross other ripples without any evidence of such.
ImageNot an actual globe, like this Faquhar globe from the 70s, but a computerized globe.

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:24 am

Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:1) While we don't "need" these contacts to the vertex, they add nuance, at the least. So someday when Mundane Sidereal Astrology forecasts are included in every local news broadcast just like weather reports, these will be handy.
Agreed; or, that is, if I do end up concluding that these are legit (and the momentum seems to be in that direction), then yes, they add more.

In fact, "nuance" seems to capture the tone of what I'm seeing. If I were to make a "working rule" right now, it would be "interpret fully without these, then go back and interpret these." A nuance example: I just did the Canlunar for Pres. Garfield's murder. It already had Saturn square Ascendant and Pluto on IC. Quite a good chart. Only an angular Sun might have made it better, linking it more solidly to the president. (Other charts did that.) But, having seen the tragic - death - loss - no turning back disruption of Saturn-Pluto, we then also have Uranus on Vertex mundanely, and Uranus on the PV squares Pluto on meridian by 0°05'. Whoa! So, what would we add? Well, we'd now call it radical, overthrowing, more disruptive, "bringing down the old," etc., which fits well enough. It doesn't describe the event as well as Saturn-Pluto, but just maybe it tells us what kind of Saturn-Pluto event it was.

Something very interesting that's coming up: We've all been excited by the upcoming Capsolar with Jupiter-Uranus along the meridian. Well... Saturn is only 0°11' off the PV (conjunct Vx). It squares Mars, which is less than 1° from the Southpoint. Saturn on PV (Vx)also squares Jupiter on meridian (IC) mundanely 1°45'. So, it's not just Jupiter-Uranus and some Sun. It's all that plus Saturn, Mars, Mars-Saturn, and Jupiter-Saturn... if what I'm seeing is, in fact, legitimate.
2) When someday comes, instead of using 3 different measurement systems, we just need to get a globe.
That would be sweet. I've had one on loan in the distant past for a few weeks, and they're useful. They're also expensive. A fabulous 3D rotational virtual globe would be even better, and the emerging VR/AR tech that will become more mainstream in the next year will make this even more feasible (and would make it really cool - live inside the globe in 3D and rotate it however you want!). Of course, then we'd be unhappy that it wasn't yet programmed to show all the intersections and flash-up when there's a crossing :)

[qupote]Somebody will try to find meaning at the points where the ripples cross other ripples without any evidence of such.[/quote]
Of course :twisted:
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:25 am

Arena wrote:This is indeed starting to sound more and more interesting. And I am sure that in the future we will have astro programs that do 3D versions of charts and mundoscopes :D
Arena, it occurs to me (after your questions the other day0, I should give you the hard numbers for your chart for comparison.

Ecliptically, you have Uranus conjunct Vertex (2°41'):
20°36' Virgo Uranus
23°17' Virgo Vertex

This appears to be confirmed by azimuth: Uranus' azimuth is 272°43', or 2°43' from due west. Nothing else falls close to 90° or 270° azimuth.

Using PV amplitude, your Uranus is 2°42' north of the Prime Vertical.

BTW, in high latitudes (like Iceland), these will behave much better, since it is much like planets on horizon near the equator.
Thanks Jim. I am 100% certain that Uranus is one of the biggest influences in my chart - whether it is by Vx contact or WP as in square the MC/IC or what - I just know it has great influence. Those numbers become partile when we consider an alternative birth time of 23.23 as I sometimes do for comparison.

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:25 am

Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:I actually have a Farquhar globe of a fairly decent size
Sweet!
Maybe there's a planetarium program we can use as a starting place.
Planetarium programs I've seen are views from the inside. We'd need one that views the celestial sphere from the outside.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4794
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Meauring Mundane Vertex contacts

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue May 09, 2017 12:25 am

Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:Well, if we start with a planetarium program, because you can flip them to see the other side of the sky, we should be able to jigger it to display the whole globe at once from the outside. But we should keep the option to view from the inside, because that's how we've seen the sky from ancient times, and because then we can have serious discussions about innies and outties, which I have not had occasion to do for far too long.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest