Research Orbs

[Guest guest]

Hi,

 

Just a note on orbs from my experience. I've had better numerical results

using fewer aspects and larger orbs. This eliminates any chance of

overlapping aspects. Generally I use only the major aspects--conj, trine,

square, opposition plus the quincunx and sextile.

 

If you combine major aspects with proximity to cusps, you aren't covering

so much territory. If you don't use proximity to cusp criteria, then your

field of possibility gets much larger.

 

However, I'm always interested in research results using any criteria.

 

Therese

 

At 12:03 PM 5/4/04 -0700, Chris wrote:

>Steve

>

>Yeah, it's probably not worth the hassle in any event. Maybe just first run

>the correlation using major aspects and say 3 degrees orb. Then redo the

>correlation using minor smaller aspects and look for similarities and

>differences. The problem with small aspects like 30 and 45 degrees is that

>a 3 degree orb is going to get way more hits than trines and oppositions and

>thereby skew the data.

>

>So for example,

>

>3* orb for trine = 3/120 = 2.5%

>3* orb for semisextile = 3/30 = 10%

>

>To make these equal weighting, you would need to reduce the semisextile orb

>down to 0.75* or expand the trine orb to 12*. Personally, I would reduce

>the minor aspect. It also follows from the above situation, that for

>conjunctions you would use 9* orb (3x3). It's all about probability in the

>end.

>

>Chris

[Guest guest]

Hi,

 

This should make you the Betty Lunsted of Sidereal studies...which is not a bad

thing. The five medieval aspects are so elemental they would seem quite enough

if

it wasn't for that Quincunx so demanding of our attention...so you get looking

at him for awhile when his little sister semi-sextile wants in, too. There's no

end to it.

 

Dark*Star

 

 

Therese Hamilton wrote:

 

> Generally I use only the major aspects--conj, trine,

> square, opposition plus the quincunx and sextile.

>