Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

fixed stars

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

You need to have the moon and the AC or MC conjunct

the star. The AC/MC within 1 or 2 degrees, and the Moon within

7 or 8 of that. This is strong enough to make a talisman from

if they are both applying. Natal will use both separating

or applying of course. The closer the Moon to the degree in

question the stronger.

You'll get some effect from the other 6 planets, but Uranus,

Neptune, and Pluto are them selves not much stronger than

fixed stars.

 

Vorcirith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, " vorcirith93 "

<vorcirith93> wrote:

>

> You need to have the moon and the AC or MC conjunct

> the star. The AC/MC within 1 or 2 degrees, and the Moon within

> 7 or 8 of that. This is strong enough to make a talisman from

> if they are both applying. Natal will use both separating

> or applying of course. The closer the Moon to the degree in

> question the stronger.

> You'll get some effect from the other 6 planets, but Uranus,

> Neptune, and Pluto are them selves not much stronger than

> fixed stars.

>

> Vorcirith

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

---The method of electing fixed stars has evolved since the time of

the Book of Hermes however. For instance a star like Cor Scorpionis

could utilize Mars conjuncting the AC or MC in the first or tenth

house and timing with planetary hours, paying attention of course to

the basic electional rules, avoiding square or oppisition with Saturn

and the moon dignified and likewise unafflicted.

Unfortunately only a handful of stars are truly known and have Sigils

that can be used. Well, 14 to be precise. A few have individual

descriptions in the sources. Many appear to have been described

by the bunch.

 

Vorcirith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

At 04:30 AM 1/21/06 -0000, fimtinnegan wrote:

>(...)

>Just because astrologers are fixated on the zodiac, we insist the sky

>should be too. But the sky is NOT -- no principle of astrology could

>possibly justify thinking that the entire sky has any relationship to

>THE EARTH'S TILT. Why would it? It. simply. does. not. make. sense.

 

I don't understand why you are relating the zodiac belt to the earth's

tilt. The Sun is a star which doesn't move except perhaps by very small

amounts of proper motion. The earth revolves through the entire zodiac each

year. The sidereal zodiac as used by astrologers is fixed, measured either

from an epoch in time or from a fixed star. Everything in the sky can be

measured along lines which converge at the north and south ecliptic poles.

These don't change over time. We simply don't know if a star on any

particular converging line has influence on that particular point of the

ecliptic (sidereal zodiac sign and degree).

 

RA and Decl do indeed depend on the earth's tilt, but these are Tropical

coordinates and use the celestial equator, the measurement of the earth's

tilt.

 

>Why would stars' positions be magically " relocated " to a position as

>much as 90 degrees away (on average, 45!), onto a circle based

>entirely on THE EARTH'S TILT? What on earth does the earth's tilt

>have to do with the stars?

 

This is a question for Tropical astrologers or for those who use RA and

Decl. The sidereal reference frame isn't based on the earth's tilt.

 

>But the STARS? Why would they be " relocated " up to 90 degrees (and

>ON AVERAGE 45 degrees)to a circle based on the earth's tilt?

 

This isn't so when using the ecliptic and its poles. No matter what the

earth's tilt is, the path around the Sun through the zodiac is still the

same. You could turn the earth upside down, and its path around the Sun

would still be the same. But if say a meteor hit the earth and shifted the

equator, then that could affect the earth's tilt, the celestial equator,

the beginning of the Tropical zodiac and RA/Decl. That would be an axis shift.

 

The sidereal reference frame is fixed in relation to the stars and our own

star, the Sun. The tropical reference frame moves with the precession of

the equinoxes.

 

Actually it seems to me that only sidereal astrologers should be using the

ecliptic for the measurement of their signs. Tropical astrolgers should be

using the celestial equator from which declination is measured.

 

If I am mistaken, anyone on this list who may be an expert in astronomy is

welcome to correct me.

 

Therese

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...