Orb reduction

[Sebastien Cheritte]

Hi all, I've posted this in the beginners section because it seems like a beginners question. However, I'm quite sure it's an important one anyway.

Suppose I have many aspects in my chart with a default orbital rate in 'equal' house system.
CHART A

But I wish to be more realistic about the tightness of the orbs, 30% realistic! also in 'equal' house system.
but then including other heavenly bodies as well.
CHART B

In my opinion, I am narrowing down the character, enough so that I am absolutely SURE about the aspects that I DO see and feel, so as to concentrate with pin-point precision, instead of the bigger picture.

Is this wise?

 

[Sebastien Cheritte]

such a delightful answer, I should like to have you answer more of my questions!
​

 

[Mark]

I typically use 2° or 3° orbs. If nothing meaningful is apparent, then I use bigger orbs to catch the looser aspects. Adjusting orb size is the best mathematical method of adjusting the precision of aspects. I want to see the tight aspects first and then whatever is left.

 

[dr. farr]

I fully agree with the reduction (late 19th century) of planetary orbs of influence. Traditionally they were quite something: with the Sun as many as 15 degrees before and after that body; Moon as many as 12 degrees before and after. Vedic astrology anciently gave smaller orbs for the planets, but even here I (personally) consider them too great. For me, 6 to 7 degrees for the Sun and Moon, and 4-5 degrees for the planets and 2-3 degrees for the Lunar nodes, 1-2 degrees for Lots/Parts, have worked quite well.

 

[Sebastien Cheritte]

For me, 6 to 7 degrees for the Sun and Moon, and 4-5 degrees for the planets and 2-3 degrees for the Lunar nodes, 1-2 degrees for Lots/Parts, have worked quite well.

Excellent! Thanks for the reassurance, looks to be the only way we can define the chart in a precise manner.

 

[astrologer50]

Hi all, I've posted this in the beginners section because it seems like a beginners question. However, I'm quite sure it's an important one anyway.

Suppose I have many aspects in my chart with a default orbital rate in 'equal' house system.
CHART A

But I wish to be more realistic about the tightness of the orbs, 30% realistic! also in 'equal' house system.
but then including other heavenly bodies as well.
CHART B

In my opinion, I am narrowing down the character, enough so that I am absolutely SURE about the aspects that I DO see and feel, so as to concentrate with pin-point precision, instead of the bigger picture.

Is this wise?

I tend to reduce the orb ratio on astro.com to 80% which I feel gives more tighter orbs.

You may like to research your venus singleton and lack of planets in earth element. You also have Yod with moon as Apex planet - BUT only if your time is accurate of course, as the moon is the quickest moving of all planets.....

 

[Sebastien Cheritte]

Hi astro(five-o)

The time's correct I assure you, isn't 80% too much?? I can't concentrate on a **** thing with all that and still include the chunks of rock floating around. Which I've come to appreciate. I zoomed to 31% actually so all planets with a 3* orb of an aspect will be relevant & visible to deal with first, as Mark mentioned further up: "I want to see the tight aspects first then whatever is left"
It seems reasonable.

About the Venus singleton, It's not my only earth 'element', if i consider the value of Pallas and everything it stands for trining with a tight 1* orb to Venus, in Virgo, I think that allows discretion enough in matters of the heart, and a somewhat calculative reserve in order to "master" this quality. But I could be wrong
What do you recommend more specifically?

 

[astrologer50]

Hi astro(five-o)

The time's correct I assure you, isn't 80% too much?? I can't concentrate on a **** thing with all that and still include the chunks of rock floating around. Which I've come to appreciate. I zoomed to 31% actually so all planets with a 3* orb of an aspect will be relevant & visible to deal with first, as Mark mentioned further up: "I want to see the tight aspects first then whatever is left"
It seems reasonable.

About the Venus singleton, It's not my only earth 'element', if i consider the value of Pallas and everything it stands for trining with a tight 1* orb to Venus, in Virgo, I think that allows discretion enough in matters of the heart, and a somewhat calculative reserve in order to "master" this quality. But I could be wrong
What do you recommend more specifically?

pallas is NOT a planet and therefore not relevent
planets in earth houses may help though

 

[Sebastien Cheritte]

pallas is NOT a planet and therefore not relevent

Planet or not, it's still an energy, and quite an important one in mythology.
You haven't read the odyssey, have you astro(five-0)?

 

[astrologer50]

Planet or not, it's still an energy, and quite an important one in mythology.
You haven't read the odyssey, have you astro(five-0)?

exactly, you said it MYTHOLOGY....

Your Asc and MC are not planets but sensitive points to

 

[Sebastien Cheritte]

Imagine being an astrologer with little to no knowledge of mythology.

 

[astrologer50]

Imagine being an astrologer with little to no knowledge of mythology.

imagine having 20years sound knowledge and understanding of *real* astrology in practise and usage.

Having little knowledge of 'mythology' is NOT a prerequisite for sound and proven practises

 

[Sebastien Cheritte]

Having little knowledge of 'mythology' is NOT a prerequisite for sound and proven practises

neither is 'ignorance' of ANY subject related or otherwise, you're doing great so far!

pallas is NOT a planet and therefore not relevent

If you feel your EXPERIENCE outweighs your TEMPERANCE, and your knowledge outweighs your tolerance, then perhaps you should go ahead and change the information so as to debunk the concept of asteroids in astrology all together, that way I won't rely on wiki at all in the future

Found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroids_in_astrology

 

[astrologer50]

neither is 'ignorance' of ANY subject related or otherwise, you're doing great so far!

Well referring back to your natal chart, I can see where you get your mental communication skills from.
Mercury square Uranus = argumentative
Mercury square Jupiter = overtalks when it should be quite and undetalks when it should be talking.

difficult how to combat these problems? by attacking members

 

[Sebastien Cheritte]

if you want to consider a 10* orb, sure. but then also consider the niceties that come with it darling!!

So busy seeing the red, that you don't see any good! Teachers should teach not bash - must be that MC you've taken such wonderful advantage of!

Too bad I can't see the rest of your chart, i would show you where you need correction...but alas, TEACHERS never like to be shown anything.

 

[BobZemco]

Imagine being an astrologer with little to no knowledge of mythology.

Astrology and mythology are incompatible and there's no relationship between the two.

The Planets act as they do not because of mythology, but because of their perceived states, ie Saturn being Cold & Dry, Jupiter being Hot & Moist etc.

If you intend to rely on mythology, then Saturn is incompetent, Jupiter is not benevolent, and Venus is the Goddess of War.

If you feel your EXPERIENCE outweighs your TEMPERANCE, and your knowledge outweighs your tolerance, then perhaps you should go ahead and change the information so as to debunk the concept of asteroids in astrology all together, that way I won't rely on wiki at all in the future

You shouldn't be relying on wiki at all since it contains information which is false and erroneous, not to mention plagiarized, which is why many universities ban its use, that is to say quoting wiki, even properly, results in failure of the course and disciplinary action, which might include being expelled from university.

I don't have to debunk asteroids. The burden of proof is on you to produce several thousand charts supporting your claims.

If you could manage to produce 100 charts I might think about considering asteroids.

You can't even agree on the meanings and then there's the stupid stuff like I the one web-site claims Chiron is the "wounded healer" except in the chart of the USA where Chiron exclusively represents the US military (but not the military of any other country).

You may like to research your venus singleton and lack of planets in earth element.

There is no "Venus singleton." Venus is Virgo and Mercury (and Neptune) are in Earth Houses.

I like how modern astrologers always contradict their own astrology.

 

[Sebastien Cheritte]

Did I become a case study? **** hypocrites!!

I also know that Pluto was named after the Disney character.

That's why Pluto's called 'Hades' where I come from, and that was long before the little girl in the school contest or Disney.

Yes, history's fun, Olivia.

Glad you pointed that out BOB!! yes, learn your houses astro(five-o) - damned corrupt cops - , not that I was any quicker to point it out.

Okay I'm going to say this here and now, I like to link astrology with things like mythology, Hinduism, Buddhism, colorful speech, creative ideas, concepts and formulas, that's who I am, if you guys have a problem with that then go answer someone else's questions, this is downright rude, I've been 'chumped' on this site by everyone with an opinion and 10+ experience. How do you suppose I learn anything if you're going to force feed me your babble!!? Should all be ashamed of yourselves!!

 

[Sebastien Cheritte]

If you haven't noticed, Olivia, this is my thread!! I started it for a reason, not so you could fill my page up with your ...tried philosophies. If you've read as much as you say you have then why don't you realize that you insult me with every remark you disgrace my page with! Block me if you don't like me and go make better use of that Merc/MC conjunction on someone who's more of a challenge for you

 

[Sebastien Cheritte]

hehe, my mistake, could'a sworn I read that in a thread of yours somewhere...anyway, look how quickly you replaced your insults with mine.

never mind,

You didn't seem to mind up there ^^ somewhere when I mentioned that planets were the original holders of orbs instead of aspects.

interesting, so you openly admit you were insulting me. if you must know, I was being diplomatic (why should I justify to her how much I know??), but there comes a stage where diplomacy isn't anything more than a mask, and yours has come off, as has mine!

But my query was serious - if you hate astrology, why come to an astrology forum, start threads (your threads, as you say), and then tell everyone who replies to them that they're insulting you and taking up your space?

Actually, I do like astrology, who told you I didn't? I simply think 99% of people using it aren't equipped with anything other than calculus and practicality.

I was suggesting (in my own way) that people should be a little more open minded!!

 

[Sebastien Cheritte]

belligerent

"pallas is NOT a planet and therefore not relevent"
- Astrologer50

"Your Asc and MC are not planets but sensitive points to"
- Astrologer50

Who mentioned them?
What was the point of saying this??

"Well referring back to your natal chart, I can see where you get your mental communication skills from.
Mercury square Uranus = argumentative
Mercury square Jupiter = overtalks when it should be quite and undetalks when it should be talking.

difficult how to combat these problems? by attacking members "
- Astrologer50

everything after this was in defense. from all angles (not astrological angles either)

and quite unfair I'll point out, i am clearly the underdog here, If I had your charts ready to pull to pieces, 'in defense' from your attack. none of you would like it very much.

- this is law.