Bradley and the Ayanamsa (Part 1) [Long Post Warning]

[Guest guest]

--- mquellas <mquellas wrote:

 

> Juan:

>

> In conversations with Jim Eshelman (who carried on

> extensive

> correspondence with Bradley and

> with Gary Duncan) I recall his saying that Bradley

> used

> the " Standard " Q2 progression rate with

> the solar and lunar ingresses.

 

Interesting.... I've heard that Fagan went back and

forth with the Bija rate(Q1)... I wonder if Bradley

didn't do the same...

Its a tough one because to me logic would support the

Bija rate over the Standard Rate yet the standard rate

appears to be more accurate.

 

 

 

Duncan's article does

> indicate that

> Bradley was using geocentric

> rather than geographic terrestrial latitudes,

> though,

 

What's the difference or rather how are the

differences measured?

 

which could

> introduce error with horizon

> contacts. I also am assuming that bodily hits were

> used, though I'm

> not certain of that.

>

> In the course of a lunar month, or even a solar

> year, there won't be

> _much_ difference between

> the timings of angular quotidian hits using either

> mean Q1 or Q2

> rates. But there is a difference

> between using mean and apparent rates. I don't know

> if there is any

> software that will calculate

> apparent rates with accuracy.

 

 

Nova was/is a good program for Sidereal Studies...

I tested its accuracy years ago in a minimal capacity

and was satisfied with it.

 

Most will do mean Q1

> or Q2 with little

> problem. This, of course,

> makes comparison of rates more difficult. Ideally, I

> would like to be

> able to settle on one rate as

> the " correct " one.

>

 

It would be nice... You have a lifetime to decide.

 

> As an illustration of the quotidian rates and their

> angles, here are

> two recent earthquakes with

> three different sets of angles.

>

> CapSolar 2003 1/15/2003 8:46:32 UT progressed to:

>

> Paso Robles, CA 35N37' 36 " 120W41' 24 " Quake

> 12/22/2003 11:15:56

> AM PST

> Mean Q1 LST 6:47: 27 MC 16 Gem 08 ASC 15

> Vir 05

> Mean Q2 LST 6:51: 12 MC 17 Gem 00 ASC 15

> Vir 51

> App. Q1 LST 6:37:48 MC 13 Gem 53 ASC

> 13 Vir 04

> Transit Saturn 15 Gem 43 R Tr Saturn culminates

> 6:45:28

>

> Bam, Iran 29N06 58E21 Quake 12/26/2003

> 5:26:52 AM IT (-3:30)

> Mean Q1 LST 18:56:32 MC 18 Sag 14 ASC 25

> Pis 18

> Mean Q2 LST 19:00:19 MC 19 Sag 06 ASC 26

> Pis 36

> App. Q1 LST 18:47:30 MC 16 Sag 08 ASC 22

> Pis 29

> Transit Saturn 15 Gem 27R anti-culminates 18:44:20

>

> I have used the populated areas where lives were

> lost rather than

> epicenters for the quakes.

>

> As you can see, even late in the period covered by

> the ingress, the

> divergence is not great.

>

> Sidereally yours,

> Matthew

>

 

No,(divergence) its not great within the course of a

year.... Lifetime of an individual though is another

story....

 

Let me ask you this...

Do you consider a progressed angle(CapSolar)

conjuncting transiting Saturn to mean an earthquake

will occur?

I'm sure you believe other factors must exist for

such an occurrence. What do you think those are and

would they appear to be consistent in repeated

occurrances?

 

I'm still troubled with an earthquake which occurred a

couple of years ago in Bhuj, India where thousands

died. An early warning of impending earthquakes could

save lives and families. The CapSolar holds much

information

 

Juan

 

 

>

>

> " How can Pluto be in Sagittarius when it's so close

> to Antares? " -----

>

> Post message:

> Subscribe:

> -

> Un:

> -

> List owner:

> -owner

>

> Shortcut URL to this page:

> /

>

>