Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
General Astrology
Other Astrology
Degree Symbols
Understanding the enumeration of the degrees
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="miquar" data-source="post: 564155" data-attributes="member: 21589"><p>Hi. I responded to this sticky on a thread following a reference to it, so I thought I would also place an edited version of that response here. </p><p></p><p>It is noted in the above post that if we were to be ultra-precise, we would start a sign at 00*00'00.00000000.......01" but that since we only work to seconds of arc we use 00*00'01"</p><p></p><p>Actually, 00*00'00.00000....01" is much much closer to 00*00'00' than it is to 00*00'01" </p><p></p><p>On the other thread, you say that today ends at 12:00:00, and tomorrow begins at 12:00:01, but then what is the date at 12:00:00.5 ? </p><p></p><p>Actually, as you suggest when talking about degrees, it would be more accurate to say that tomorrow starts at 12:00:00.00000.....01 than to say it starts at 12:00:01</p><p></p><p>In each case, we are trying to find the smallest increment possible, so that our notation doesn't suggest that there is a gap between the beginning of one degree/sign/day and the next. In other words, we are saying that the point in time when a day ends and another begins, or the point on the ecliptic where one sign/degree ends and another begins, is infinitesimally small.</p><p></p><p>In the past I have thought of a sign ending at 29*59'59", but on reflection I wouldn't use this method or the method you suggested - I would say that a sign ends at 30*00'00" and the next sign begins at 00*00'00" and that these are exactly the same point.</p><p></p><p>Software that astrologers use often rounds values off to the nearest second of arc. This means that when a value of 00*00'00" or 30*00'00" is given, we don't actually know if it is at the very end of one sign or the very beginning of the next. And it means that when a value of 03*00'00" is given, we don't know if it is at the very end of the 3rd degree of the sign, or the very beginning of the 4th degree.</p><p></p><p>Only one in every 3600 values will be given as 00'00" where values are rounded off to the nearest second of arc. But often we only see degrees and minutes, which means that one in 60 values are ambiguous. In these cases, we can investigate further if we want to try to find out which side of that infinitesimally small point the factor is on. Personally I would shy away from using the Sabian symbol in such cases.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="miquar, post: 564155, member: 21589"] Hi. I responded to this sticky on a thread following a reference to it, so I thought I would also place an edited version of that response here. It is noted in the above post that if we were to be ultra-precise, we would start a sign at 00*00'00.00000000.......01" but that since we only work to seconds of arc we use 00*00'01" Actually, 00*00'00.00000....01" is much much closer to 00*00'00' than it is to 00*00'01" On the other thread, you say that today ends at 12:00:00, and tomorrow begins at 12:00:01, but then what is the date at 12:00:00.5 ? Actually, as you suggest when talking about degrees, it would be more accurate to say that tomorrow starts at 12:00:00.00000.....01 than to say it starts at 12:00:01 In each case, we are trying to find the smallest increment possible, so that our notation doesn't suggest that there is a gap between the beginning of one degree/sign/day and the next. In other words, we are saying that the point in time when a day ends and another begins, or the point on the ecliptic where one sign/degree ends and another begins, is infinitesimally small. In the past I have thought of a sign ending at 29*59'59", but on reflection I wouldn't use this method or the method you suggested - I would say that a sign ends at 30*00'00" and the next sign begins at 00*00'00" and that these are exactly the same point. Software that astrologers use often rounds values off to the nearest second of arc. This means that when a value of 00*00'00" or 30*00'00" is given, we don't actually know if it is at the very end of one sign or the very beginning of the next. And it means that when a value of 03*00'00" is given, we don't know if it is at the very end of the 3rd degree of the sign, or the very beginning of the 4th degree. Only one in every 3600 values will be given as 00'00" where values are rounded off to the nearest second of arc. But often we only see degrees and minutes, which means that one in 60 values are ambiguous. In these cases, we can investigate further if we want to try to find out which side of that infinitesimally small point the factor is on. Personally I would shy away from using the Sabian symbol in such cases. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
General Astrology
Other Astrology
Degree Symbols
Understanding the enumeration of the degrees
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top