Secondary Progressions versus Primary Directions

Q&A and discussion on Secondary Progressions.
Post Reply
Profit
Satellite Member
Satellite Member
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:39 pm

Secondary Progressions versus Primary Directions

Post by Profit » Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:40 am

What are the parameters that you recommend utilizing for Primary directions? How do you compare Secondary progressed Charts versus Primary Direction Arc charts?

User avatar
Jupiter Sets at Dawn
Irish
Irish
Posts: 2768
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 7:03 pm

Re: Secondary Progressions versus Primary Directions

Post by Jupiter Sets at Dawn » Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:51 am

I don't compare compare Secondary progressed Charts versus Primary Direction Arc charts. I just use them both. There's no versus. They are different techniques and give different information.

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Marduk
Posts: 9094
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm
Gender:

Re: Secondary Progressions versus Primary Directions

Post by Jim Eshelman » Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:39 pm

Profit wrote:
Thu Feb 28, 2019 10:40 am
What are the parameters that you recommend utilizing for Primary directions? How do you compare Secondary progressed Charts versus Primary Direction Arc charts?
It's possible I'm not understanding the question be cause people use "primary directions" to mean several different things. Are you refer to the whole "circles of position" theory, an alternate mundane rotational theory or - perhaps - just the "primary motion angles" that are the non-quotidian, roughly degree-a-year angles of what most astrologers consider secondary progressions?
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

Profit
Satellite Member
Satellite Member
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:39 pm

Re: Secondary Progressions versus Primary Directions

Post by Profit » Thu Feb 28, 2019 2:54 pm

Through one's testing a chartist chooses preferences for their research....

For secondary progressions I prefer to utilize the mean quotidian Q2 formula...

Solar Arc charting is not something that I have given any attention to. Only now learning of their opportunities....

When I ask for insight into comparison I'm interested in learning process(example, Natal Solar Rate in RA vs Solar Rate in Longitude) as well as opinions as to why one would utilize them in the first place.

Rationale often changes with the winds of time.... Charting progression to location versus to location of where one was at their early stage of development is a personal choice just as one utilizing Q2 over Q1... etc... etc...

I defer to the transits usually as I readily experience their abilities... tMars/Sun Midpoint in opposition to natal Neptune currently etc...etc....

User avatar
Jupiter Sets at Dawn
Irish
Irish
Posts: 2768
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 7:03 pm

Re: Secondary Progressions versus Primary Directions

Post by Jupiter Sets at Dawn » Thu Feb 28, 2019 4:15 pm

Google search for "solar arc progressions"
A good choice to start off with would be https://alabe.com/solararc.html

You can also search this forum (use the search box at the top right of the page) and see what you come up with.

SteveS
Irish
Irish
Posts: 2701
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 5:11 am
Gender:

Re: Secondary Progressions versus Primary Directions

Post by SteveS » Thu Feb 28, 2019 4:24 pm

Profit wrote:
Solar Arc charting is not something that I have given any attention to. Only now learning of their opportunities....
Solar Arc charting is a key progression, mainly because everything in the chart is moving basically one degree per year and their planetary hits are very important timing indicators. Whereas, with Secondary Progressions, planets are moving much slower (not 1 degree per year), which is important to understand/see.

Solar Arc Angle Directions are much more important timing indicators than Solar Arc Planetary Directions, and if understand properly Solar Arc Angle Directions will be seen as the same timing indicator as Secondary Progression as long as your computer is set to SA in Long. What computer program are you using? I may be able to help you further with your understanding of the answers to your questions if your computer program is Solarfire.

Jim, if I have miss-stated anything with my terminology, please correct me.

Profit
Satellite Member
Satellite Member
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:39 pm

Re: Secondary Progressions versus Primary Directions

Post by Profit » Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:33 pm

Thanks SteveS for your msg...

I use Solarfire…


I look forward to hearing back from you

SteveS
Irish
Irish
Posts: 2701
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 5:11 am
Gender:

Re: Secondary Progressions versus Primary Directions

Post by SteveS » Sat Mar 02, 2019 3:26 am

Hi Profit, a couple of questions. Do you know how to calculate Solar Arc and Secondary charts with your Solarfire program? Since your last post was concerning Trump's cycles here is a Secondary chart (1) for Trump and a Solar Arc (2) chart for Trump calculated today in DC.

1: https://imgur.com/3YcMNfo Secondary Progressed

2: https://imgur.com/VeCPBB7 Solar Arc Direction

Note the different planetary placements and angle placements, but the MC/IC is the same. Can you produce these same two charts with your SF program?

Profit
Satellite Member
Satellite Member
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:39 pm

Re: Secondary Progressions versus Primary Directions

Post by Profit » Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:56 pm

Hi SteveS…

From your post I understand that you utilize the option "SA in Long" when computing secondary Progressions...
I've read "its rationale is obscure". How would you respond to that and how does it compare with Naibod in RA?
My setting has been Mean Quotidian however Solarfire limits choices to only a few options. Before there was Solarfire my software of choice was Nova which provided more options where I found myself relying on the Neo-Quotidian rate. Nova/Chartwheels is still available from Alabe and provides many options for chart calculations that Solarfire does not. I would like to learn more about the use of Nova/Chartwheels and will investigate if training is available. If I see something better at providing accuracy I attempt to understand its rationale and utilize it(if possible).


In Solarfire there is a preferences page. There is a window for Progs/Dims... I presume under Chart Angle Progressions you go with SA in Long.
"Rate for User Progs" shows 0.002737909(and appears to be the only option)

"Rate for Primary Directions" offers a number of options.... .. Do You utilize and do you have a preference and why? This particular page for editing preferences was part of the basis for my question Secondary Progressions versus Primary Directions... What are we doing when we choose in "Rate for Primary Directions" Naibod versus Kepler?

Q2 or Q1? Choice of Logic(Q1) for me does not match up with the results(more accurate) that appear when Q2 is utilized... Then again that is my personal assessment. What little time I have spent in this forum I've witnessed where some of my personal assessments agree and disagree with others(Jim) here. I don't know if I have ever met with an astrologer that I agreed with 95% of the time and that's especially true of Siderealists who are the most independently minded of all.

Am looking forward to learning more from you SteveS so I will curtail this diatribe. Personally I am not a big fan of progressions however I recognize that they do engage a realm of influence and because of that observation of them is essential. A day for a year makes sense to me.... it also begs the question what do you mean by a day?

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Marduk
Posts: 9094
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm
Gender:

Re: Secondary Progressions versus Primary Directions

Post by Jim Eshelman » Sun Mar 03, 2019 1:16 pm

Profit wrote:
Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:56 pm
From your post I understand that you utilize the option "SA in Long" when computing secondary Progressions...
I've read "its rationale is obscure". How would you respond to that and how does it compare with Naibod in RA?
I used Naibod in RA for decades as a reasonable fit and, simply, as reasonable. Then I ran into a series of events for which progressing these by MC at Solar Arc in longitude was a dead-on hit, pushing me into a reassessment of the whole thing and, on extensive side-by-side comparisons for events with well-timed birth charts, the SA Long was decisively better.

So (speaking for myself, not Steve), my rationale is that it works better. I will always take demonstrable results over theory. A neat, easy theory is gratifying when I can have it, but I won't let it get in the way of empirical results.
My setting has been Mean Quotidian however Solarfire limits choices to only a few options.
That's my default setting to (especially since all of my defaults are set for mundane astrology). It seems that primary-like angles and quotidians work independently with natal and secondary planets, and quotidians also for transits.
In Solarfire there is a preferences page. There is a window for Progs/Dims... I presume under Chart Angle Progressions you go with SA in Long.
Yes.
"Rate for User Progs" shows 0.002737909(and appears to be the only option)
You can set it to any value you want. I have mine permanently at 0.003430114 which is a very close approximation of the PSSR rate (linear, i.e., mean solar argument, not apparent solar).
Q2 or Q1?
That's being debated afresh here. For myself, I rely on several studies I've done which give around a three-to-1 advantage of Q2 over Q1. I'd like to think (though I might be wrong) that only one of these rates can be right, the other being an aberration; or, if they are both somehow workable, it makes no sense to me to rely on something that is only the better rate one time in four. Others use the two interchangeably, thinking both are independently valid. The debate continues, probably fueled by the fact that quotidians are nearly as "big deal, always rely on them" as we'd like to think but, rather, probably "tip something over the edge" when the opportunity is presented.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

SteveS
Irish
Irish
Posts: 2701
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 5:11 am
Gender:

Re: Secondary Progressions versus Primary Directions

Post by SteveS » Mon Mar 04, 2019 5:58 am

Profit wrote/asked:
From your post I understand that you utilize the option "SA in Long" when computing secondary Progressions... I've read "its rationale is obscure". How would you respond to that and how does it compare with Naibod in RA?
As a member of this forum since its birth, I came to this forum and basically asked Jim the same question Profit. Based on my life experiences, I had already picked SA in Long as the rate to progress my secondary angles, but I wanted to know Jim’s experiences with this matter. Jim responded by saying with his testing stacks of charts; he concluded the “Sa in Long” proved to be the best tested Solarfire selection, but I think Jim started out early in his astrological career using Naibod in RA. When it comes to testing stacks of charts no one can hold a flame to Jim with statistical testing.

I will take the single most important event to occur in my entire life looking back on 71 years of life. I was born into the Movies Business and it had always been my sole Dream to own as an Independent Theater Owner, my own Theater, answering to no one except my own God Given Universal Talent (innate knowledge) in the Theater Business. This independent ownership and dream happen on Oct 31, 1987, 11:00 AM. The bi-wheel chart below (1) is my Secondary Progressed Chart, “SA in Long” (inside wheel), and my Natal Chart (outside wheel).

NOTE:
“SA in Long” MC 16,04 Virgo.
NATAL Neptune 16,01 Virgo
BINGO! With my Natal Neptune symbolizing the Movie Business and my sole life Dream.

1: https://imgur.com/9yM9kDM

Now let us look at the same timed chart (2) using Naibod in RA (link below): ***Note:
“Naibod in RA” MC 19,03 Virgo, 3 years off for nailing the event compared to using “SA in Long.” The only other better progression rate in a perfect secondary progression world-- relative to my life-- which would have created a better Secondary Progressed angled rate for me would have been if this huge event in my life would have produced a Uranus—Neptune Paran, but I know of no Secondary progressed angled rate producing this Paran. FWIW, combined with my upmost respect for Jim’s research methods and my own life—without a doubt-- the “SA in Long” is the correct Solarfire selection for Secondary Progressions. Profit, I will late offer you my opinions on your other important questions.

2: https://imgur.com/CvcdnQ9

SteveS
Irish
Irish
Posts: 2701
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 5:11 am
Gender:

Re: Secondary Progressions versus Primary Directions

Post by SteveS » Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:46 am

Profit asked:
Q2 or Q1?
Profit, first, my favorite Quotidian Chart to work with is the Solar Quotidian (SQ), and since we will not see much difference between Q1 or Q2 progressed rates in a year’s time there is no debate here with the SQ using either the Q1 or Q2. The debate begins with the Natal Quotidian between the NQ1 and NQ2 rates. I have seen too many ‘outstanding incident’ NQ1’s to totally ignore the NQ1, but I have not seen the same amount of ‘outstanding incident’ NQ2’s relative to my astrological work. This is somewhat a puzzle to my mind but I do make this a big issue with debates between the NQ1/NQ2. The type astrology I practice is mainly ‘outstanding incident’ astrology. After practicing astrology for 40 years I am mainly interested in charts which classify themselves with an ‘outstanding incident,’ and it is very rare to see an ‘outstanding incident’ Quotidian Chart involving partile aspects with both the angles and moons, so rare, it’s not worth debating the Natal Q1/Q2 issue, imo. Another KEY for me is isolating with very narrow parameters when I WILL pay attention to both the NQ1 & NQ2 charts, and that is when I KNOW either for myself or a client, friend, or family member they have isolated an ‘out of ordinary day’ scheduled in their future. Even then, 95% of the time I see NO ‘outstanding incident’ structure with Natal Quotidians. But, I do see a-lot of solid symbolic hits with the Solar Quotidians (SQ’s) for other people within my immediate environment and myself, enough so, that I pay close attention to the SQ’s when doing detailed work with the stack of Sidereal Astrology charts. I have my specific reasons for believing the SQ charts offer many more hits than the NQ charts, with the main reason, the Natal goes with us all our life and is just one chart in the stack, but our Solar Returns change every year and are clearly recognized in Sidereal Astrology as the Uno # 1 chart in Sidereal Astrology for forecasting. I will really pay close attention to the SQ angles when I see the SQ putting on partile 0,90,180 aspects to solar or natal planets, and I will pay closer attention to the NQ’s when I see either or both the NQ1 or NQ2 moon in the same partile aspects to only Natal Planets—not Solar Planets. Our 4 Moons are critical for close analysis with Sidereal Astrology when they are in partile 0,90,180 aspects. 1: Natal Moon, 2: Solar Moon, 3:Secondary Progressed Natal Moon, 4: Secondary Progressed Solar Moon.

Let me offer that same dated event in my life (Oct 31, 1987, 11,00 AM, Albertville, Alabama) I posted in my preceding post, but this time we will isolate the action with my Q1 & Q2 Moons.

Q2 Moon 24,28 Aries
NA Saturn 24,03 Cancer

A very sad day. I completely separated myself from a company and its stockholder of dozens of years, which I started working with when I was 6 years old.

Q1 Moon 22,56 Aries
NQ1 Mars 22,05 Cancer

On this same week, I had to sit down with my attorney and a bankrupt Judge in order to clear legal proceedings in order for me to own a Theater belonging to this same company, which had been shut down for over a year. The Judge price the total assets of this Theater at 7,400 $, and I had to borrow this money to secure ownership of the Theater. Believe me it was a legal WAR from hell—the stockholders of the company did not want me to own this Theater because they knew I could reopen-it and make $. The stockholders wanted to file chapter 7, and with me legally securing this bankrupt-closed down Theater, they feared they would not be able to close the doors of the entire Company under a Chapter 7.

Now, If I had to choose from either the above NQ1 or NQ2 as being the only valid Q chart, I would definitely pick the NQ1. This situation was much more a legal war that it was a sad day for me separating myself from a company I worked for 36 years. I was fighting (Mars) for my livelihood.

Profit, I hope this post helps you in your quest to understand the issues between NQ1/NQ2. My best advice is go with your own personal experiences with looking at both the NQ1 and NQ2, particularly the two NQ Moons. Bradley leaned toward the Q2 as Jim, and for most of his life Fagan leaned toward the Q1. IMO, we can’t ignore either favor of these two Sidereal Astrology giants with their experiences with these Q Moons/Angles.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests