Stretching the System - Research Results

General Discussion on Mundane Astrology matters for which a specific forum does not exist.
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Posts: 4408
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Stretching the System - Research Results

Post by Jim Eshelman » Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:49 am

Steve, there's no easy way to do this, and no way to plot them on a map with current tools. This sucks, because it turns out they are as strong as any other aspect we've been historically paying attention to mundane astrology (and probably natal, too). It's such a big deal that I'm currently working on a new edition of SMA that incorporates these and re-rates every chart referenced in the book (thousands of individual charts, keeping the rating standards consistent, and then reworking all the statistics on chart performance on the end).

Here is a compressed overview of what we're looking at.

Astrology uses a framework of three mutually-perpendicular great circles, the horizon, meridian, and prime vertical. We are used to the fact that planets on the horizon or meridian are angular, and we measure this through the third circle, the prime vertical. This includes measuring mundane conjunctions, oppositions, an d squares between planets on the horizon and meridian.

As a generalization: Relationships between any two of these circles is measured in the third (which is at right angles to it). If one planet is on the meridian and another planet on the horizon, they are square - at right angles to each other - measured along the prime vertical because the whole horizon and whole meridian are at right angles to each other as seen from the perspective of the prime vertical.

But it works the same (in principle) in other combinations. Please visualize this:

1. If one planet is on the meridian and another on the prime vertical, they are exactly square as measured along the horizon.

2. If one planet is on the horizon and another on the prime vertical, they are exactly square as measured along the meridian.

The good news: We have a way to measure along the horizon. It's called azimuth. It's exactly the framework for measuring the relationship between a planet on the meridian and one on the prime vertical.

The bad news: We have no direct way to measure along the meridian. I've had to invent a "fudge" that is close enough in most (maybe all) cases.

Another thing to mention in theory before I give you actual steps: Proximity to the horizon or meridian grants "foreground" or "angular" status. (We use that all the time, right?) But proximity to the prime vertical does not appear to do that. I've done different kinds of tests and, at least in mundane astrology where we have the most flawless chart times, neither ecliptical nor mundane contact with the Vertex "works" as a kind of angularity. It would be a gross error to treat it as if it does. However, we now know that planets mundanely on the Vertex-Antivertex form important aspects with planets on the horizon or meridian , and that often looks like they have angularity qualities! (But it's all in the geometry of the angularity.)

So... how do we find these with tools available to us such as Solar Fire?

First, see if there are planets within, say, 3° of the prime vertical. To do this, click Reports and look at the Azimuth column. If a planet is within 3° of 90° (Antivertex, due east) or 270° (Vertex, due west), you have something to work with. Second, note whether there are any planets mundanely on the horizon or meridian.

If you have more than one planet on the PV (within 3° of east or west in azimuth), they may form an aspect with each other - just run a Z-Analogue Azi (Azimuth) chart and read the orb (or read it right off the Azimuth column on the chart report).

If you have one or more planets on the PV and one or more closely conjunct MC or IC, also run the Azimuth analogue chart and read the aspect directly.

But if you have one or more planets on the PV mundanely, and one or more planets on the horizon, we have to look up two other factors and subtract them to get a close approximation of whether they have a mundane aspect measured along the meridian. To do this, compare the altitude of the planet on the horizon (get this from the Report on the chart) to the prime vertical amplitude (distance N or S of the PV) from an Z-Analogue PV Amp chart.

Here is an example of not finding such an aspect:

My natal chart for birthplace has Pluto at azimuth 87°13, or 2°47' before the Antivertex. This alerts me to a possible aspect to investigate, since I have Moon on horizon. But I can tell in a second that I won't find one because my Moon is 3°44' after the horizon (altitude -3°34'). To c0onfirm this, I run a Z-Analogue PV Amp chart and see Pluto, in amplitude, is only 2°22' before the Antivertex (rather than 2°47' as measured in azimuth). Pluto being 2°22' before the prime vertical in amplitude and Moon 3°44' after the horizon in altitude means that (within a small margin of error) they are 6°06' from a mundane square - and I'm looking for something within 3°. No aspect here.

Here is an example of finding such an aspect:

In the current Capsolar for Washington, Saturn is azimuth 269°46', meaning she is 0°14' before due west (270°). The Capsolar has Uranus on MC and Jupiter on IC close enough that there might be something here. The easiest way to find out is to run an Azimuth analogue chart (or read azimuth straight from the chart report). Uranus, at azimuth 185°03', is 5°03' past Midheaven, and too wide an orb to be squaring Saturn. However, Jupiter, at azimuth 1°31', is only 1°31' past IC. Jupiter 1°31' past IC and Saturn 0°14' before Vertex are 1°45' from exact square measured along the third circle, the horizon. In the Azimuth analogue chart you can see this easily as:

Saturn 0°14' in 7th house
Jupiter 28°29' in 3rd house
1°45' square

And if this sounds tedious, just remember that I just did this for every solar ingress and every lunar ingress across over 300 events - something like 2,000 charts.
Jim Eshelman

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest