Introduction Libra Suns; 28-form mansions from zero-Taurus

[Guest guest]

Hi Julia, sorry for the tardy response. had me logged out for

two days and all groups showed up empty! I find what you wrote very

interesting and something I want to give some thought to.

 

There are flaws in that study and it should really be redone. It was,

after all, done in 1980 using single precision un-optimized planetary

routines and I was only aware of two ayanamsas at that time. I was

suspicious then of the many significant outcomes and, for that reason,

used that data as the first run in the Ayanamsa statistical study to

see what turned up.

 

What did turn up was that all 24 different ayanamsas ChiSquare values

were significant and permitted rejection of the null hypothesis at the

0.05 level! (the test included a random ayanamsa and the tropical

ayanamsa [=0]). It was at this point that I shelved the Clergy and

switched to Gauquelin's timed data using the moon.

 

But your thoughts have reawakened my interest in the 28 fold scheme and

Krittika and will plan to redo the study using G's data, the ayanamsa

set and the moon.

 

I'll also look at the ayanamsa you mentioned. Thanks for including the

value and epoch.

 

BTW, you do good work when you're asleep!

 

Buz

 

 

, " Julia Cybele "

<julia_cybele wrote:

>

> Buz,

>

> I was thinking more about that chi-squared significance test favoring

> the 28-fold mansion scheme and tried modeling it.

>

> If one were taking 0º Taurus as the starting point of both the zodiac

> and the nakshatra wheel, there is a dim but nearly-perfect fiducial

> star possibility: " 13 Taurus " lies about one minute of arc from the

> ecliptic. To keep our coordinates in a way that maintains easier

> compatability with comparison models, I call this point 30º and match

> the beginning point of Krittika there, keeping it as #3 in sequence.

> This lower-5th magnitude star, visible, but inconspicuous, has the

> virtue of having very little proper motion in the component of

> ecliptic longitude. It takes nearly 400 years to shift a single second

> of arc! In contrast, Spica shifts that much in only 15 years.

>

> This model places a lot of the nakshatra stars very close to the

> beginning points of each. The 28-fold system fits with a larger

> ayanamsha value. Choice of 13 Taurus as beginning point of that sign

> gives an ayanamsha of 27º50'48.6 " for J2000.0, projecting that the

> Sidereal Zodiac aligned with the equinox points approximately at the

> AUTUMNAL equinox of 4 BCE, JD=1720227. not greatly different from the

> DeLuce value. I think this matches closely with one of your high-

> performing models for the list of 19th century English clergymen,

> because for the year 1847 or so, the ayanamsha value would be about

> 25º43' or 2/28 of a full circle, aligning a tropical nakshatra wheel

> with a sidereal one for the middle of the 19th century. See if that

> makes any sense vis-a-vis the models. I might be too sleepy to get it

> right

>

> , " Buz Overbeck " <buz.

> overbeck@> wrote:

>

> >

> > You also mention that you feel a 28-fold mansion scheme seems to

> work

> > better than the 27. You might be interested in a followup article

> > called " The Sun in the Lunar Mansions " , which was published back in

> > 1980 in Charles Jayne's Cosmocology Bulletin. It seems to support

> your

> > theory. You can find it here:

> >

> > http://members.toast.net/overbeck/Articles.html

> >

> >

>