Can we talk about orbs?

[mercuryforward]

Lately I’ve been wondering about the clutter in some of the charts generated with the wonderful Astrodienst. I adore that site, I really do, and am grateful for their fantastic service. But the orbs used, if you leave it as is in the settings, are way too generous. Or am I wrong about this?

Is there a general consensus regarding orbs?

Looking at what Anthony Louis writes in his book on horary, Lilly, who attributed orbs to the planets and not the aspects, the sphere of influence of these planets on one another seems much smaller.

So an orb of, say, 10 degrees for a luminary is really 5 degrees in either direction. Neat. And the way it works is that the orb of each planet combines to the allowed maximum of each. If they are within that range, they connect. I’m including a screenshot.

What do you think? Is this too restrictive? And what about outside of horary? Would we be using the same size orbs or bigger?

In addition, I personally find it important to make the distinction between applying g and separating aspects. A separating aspect is like somebody mumbling goodbye under his breath while ambling toward the door, already preoccupied with the next great aspect. It doesn’t deserve the attention of an applying aspect, what do you guys think?

 

[JUPITERASC]

Lately I’ve been wondering about the clutter in some of the charts generated with the wonderful Astrodienst. I adore that site, I really do, and am grateful for their fantastic service. But the orbs used, if you leave it as is in the settings, are way too generous. Or am I wrong about this?

Is there a general consensus regarding orbs?

Looking at what Anthony Louis writes in his book on horary, Lilly, who attributed orbs to the planets and not the aspects, the sphere of influence of these planets on one another seems much smaller.

So an orb of, say, 10 degrees for a luminary is really 5 degrees in either direction. Neat. And the way it works is that the orb of each planet combines to the allowed maximum of each. If they are within that range, they connect. I’m including a screenshot.

What do you think? Is this too restrictive? And what about outside of horary? Would we be using the same size orbs or bigger?

In addition, I personally find it important to make the distinction between applying g and separating aspects. A separating aspect is like somebody mumbling goodbye under his breath while ambling toward the door, already preoccupied with the next great aspect. It doesn’t deserve the attention of an applying aspect, what do you guys think?View attachment 91428

TABLES TO SHOW ORBS FOR ASPECTUAL CONTACT

Skyscript study aids: Traditional Orb Tables

Tables to indicate the orb limits for aspectual contact

www.skyscript.co.uk

The word '...aspect...' comes from the Latin aspicio, '...to regard...'
It is first encountered during the Middle Ages
but before this similar words were used
to say that the planets '...regarded...'
'...beheld...'
'...viewed...'
'...looked at...'
'...witnessed...'
or
'...saw...'
each other.

Many traditional texts tell us that it is not correct to call the conjunction an aspect
the reason being
that conjoining planets do not meet by sight
but join together in physical reality.
The term is usually prefixed by the word corporeal ('...bodily'...)
emphasising that the union is an actual one
rather than a blending of rays

Some astrologers argue that the term was only appropriate
when the event occurred upon similar parallels of celestial latitude


.

 

[waybread]

Normally I use up to 10 degrees on either side for the sun and moon, and 5 to 7 degrees for planets, assuming major aspects. If I use minor aspects I keep the orbs very tight, within a couple of degrees.

But also, I read a wide orb differently than a tight orb. If we compare orbs to listening to music, the volume is turned way up on a tight orb. The volume is turned down on a wide orb.

 

[dr. farr]

I use tight Orbs-usually 5 for conjunction/opposition, 4 trine/square, 3 sextile, 2 for declination; I don’t give much influence to separating aspects; I use up to 3 degrees for conjunction with bright stars.

 

[sinhtheslumberingdragon]

I use tight Orbs-usually 5 for conjunction/opposition, 4 trine/square, 3 sextile, 2 for declination; I don’t give much influence to separating aspects; I use up to 3 degrees for conjunction with bright stars.

So strict!

I consider orbs to be on either side, that is for example the sun 15 degree on the right and left (sun aspects entire sign)

I consider degree application across sign boundaries, as reckoning by degree is far more impactful than by sign

I even consider out of sign conjunctions within the respective orbs for natal - though of course not as effective as if they shared the same degree and sign

I use Lilly 5 degree orb for the bright stars (royal stars, algol, sirius,spica and then some others) and then between 1-2 degrees for stars of less brightness

 

[dr. farr]

i use such strict orbS to cut down aspects-I give heavy influence to placement + declination + star connections, plus I make use of “the shadow” -dodeks (primarily Pauline) giving the dodek place & relationships a good 50% as much delineative importance as the original placement & relations-for clarity I try to avoid being overwhelmed by aspects.

 

[sinhtheslumberingdragon]

i use such strict orbS to cut down aspects-I give heavy influence to placement + declination + star connections, plus I make use of “the shadow” -dodeks (primarily Pauline) giving the dodek place & relationships a good 50% as much delineative importance as the original placement & relations-for clarity I try to avoid being overwhelmed by aspects.

What are the pauline dodecatemoria? Can you give an example calculation

 

[dr. farr]

Yes-the degrees of the planet are multiplied by 13, then 30 degrees going forward are removed until no more can be subtracted-this yields the shadow place-dodek-of the planet; Egyptian dodeks use a multiplying factor of 12, same subtraction method; Valens made the Egyptian method known, Paul ofAlexandria the “Pauline”
example-mars@ 10 Aries = 130 degrees (by 13) -120 degrees (since 150 degrees would be. too much) = 4 signs foreword = Leo 10 plus original 10 degrees mars dodek -Leo 20.

 

[wan]

Normally I use up to 10 degrees on either side for the sun and moon

Really? I feel that that's really wide, even for the lights.

I would use 8 degrees.

 

[waybread]

Really. But as with my radio analogy in my previous post, a wide orb isn't going to be so strong a factor in a person's life as a very tight orb. Think about whether the volume is turned up or down.

I don't know if you're into harmonics, but a wide conjunction of 10 degrees is actually a square in a 9H chart. You can calculate your 9H chart on the free charts pages at Astrodienst, if you're interested. In western astrology, the 9H as 3x3 is interpreted as a weak trine, or your capacity for joy and delight. In Hindu astrology, the "navamsa" chart, is interpreted more as the spiritual "fruits" of your life, or accomplishments from the perspective of later in life. A square in the 9H, regardless, would suggest stresses in attaining joy or the gifts of your soul.

If I do my 9H chart in the sidereal (Hindu) zodiac, I get a huge focus on Mars-Jupiter in Scorpio. Which may say something about my posting style on this forum.

Anyway, in considering wide orbs in the natal chart, it is worthwhile looking at whether the involved planets may produce more meaningful results in a harmonic chart. Another example would be the quincunx of 150 degrees. With too wide an orb, you bump into the tri-septile of 154 degrees or a bi-quintile of 144 degrees. So even with the luminaries involved, that would be one case where a tight orb is advisable.

 

[IleneK]

Really? I feel that that's really wide, even for the lights.

I would use 8 degrees.

I don't think 10 degrees is wide for horary.
Check out this info on orbs from Deb Houlding's site: http://www.skyscript.co.uk/aspectorbs.html

 

[tikana]

Lately I’ve been wondering about the clutter in some of the charts generated with the wonderful Astrodienst. I adore that site, I really do, and am grateful for their fantastic service. But the orbs used, if you leave it as is in the settings, are way too generous. Or am I wrong about this?

Is there a general consensus regarding orbs?

Looking at what Anthony Louis writes in his book on horary, Lilly, who attributed orbs to the planets and not the aspects, the sphere of influence of these planets on one another seems much smaller.

So an orb of, say, 10 degrees for a luminary is really 5 degrees in either direction. Neat. And the way it works is that the orb of each planet combines to the allowed maximum of each. If they are within that range, they connect. I’m including a screenshot.

What do you think? Is this too restrictive? And what about outside of horary? Would we be using the same size orbs or bigger?

In addition, I personally find it important to make the distinction between applying g and separating aspects. A separating aspect is like somebody mumbling goodbye under his breath while ambling toward the door, already preoccupied with the next great aspect. It doesn’t deserve the attention of an applying aspect, what do you guys think?View attachment 91428

I crack knuckles over this issue ..i want to say yes and no
Lets say you ask will i get a job within 5 mnths and you get out of orb aspect without interferences. I think the answer would be yes but a little longer than 5 months.
Buut if you ask when will i get the job, orbs moiety should not matter at all. I am still puzzled over the orbs. Theres a discussion on skyscript on this very topic.