Sidereal Astrology is More Accurate

Choe said:

Wait! Are you aware that the geocentric method presumes that the Sun circulates around the Earth? You can't compare the Sun and the Earth like you did, because the Sun is statical.

Click to expand...

No it isn't. It orbits around the galactic center. Everything orbits around all sorts of other things and eventually it's just better to assume a non-inertial reference frame and put yourself (or sometimes another object) at the center of the universe. Yes, you're the center of the universe now, as am I.

Rebel Uranian said:

No it isn't. It orbits around the galactic center. Everything orbits around all sorts of other things and eventually it's just better to assume a non-inertial reference frame and put yourself (or sometimes another object) at the center of the universe. Yes, you're the center of the universe now, as am I.

Click to expand...

Yeah,but the planets you use (regardless of whether you are TA or MA),are part of the Solar System,which means the Sun is statical in that system.

If you use some other planets who are not part of the Solar System then you can say that the Sun orbits too.

I use the Earth as the center of the Earthal System. It has 7 planets of one type that make "the spheres," 2 ice giants of another that behave strangely, and a bunch of random objects that I don't care about. It is easier to calculate the Earthal System with the Sun as the center, but easy doesn't always mean right.

Rebel Uranian said:

I use the Earth as the center of the Earthal System. It has 7 planets of one type that make "the spheres," 2 ice giants of another that behave strangely, and a bunch of random objects that I don't care about. It is easier to calculate the Earthal System with the Sun as the center, but easy doesn't always mean right.

Click to expand...

Show me a link that proves that this term exists in science(astronomy).

Hey thanks for the share :

Shanti said:

I don't know much about Heliocentric charts but there was an thread about it on astro.com.
http://forum.astro.com/cgi/forum.cgi?num=1321708797/0#0

Isaac Starckman who is a skilled astrologer have done much in the area..

Click to expand...

Well well well, now that I have discovered that there is more to astrology than the geocentric perspective (even from the geocentric perspective, I need to understand my sidereal chart better. I am pretty familiar with my tropical chart, but I don't understand my vedic sidereal chart as much), I experimented with the heliocentric perspective a bit.

I'll definitely have to get a new understanding of my birth chart from a heliocentric angle, though I'm more inclined to believe that the sidereal chart may be more accurate because I would find it really strange to only have water and earth in my chart.

JUPITERASC said:

There are Western Sidereal Astrologers - eg Cyril Fagan http://www.westernsiderealastrology.com/cyrilfagan/cyrilfagan.asp and here's another website that refers to Cyril Fagan http://www.eclipses.biz/ancient_mistake.html

Click to expand...

and

Yuusha said:

Well well well, now that I have discovered that there is more to astrology than the geocentric perspective (even from the geocentric perspective, I need to understand my sidereal chart better. I am pretty familiar with my tropical chart, but I don't understand my vedic sidereal chart as much), I experimented with the heliocentric perspective a bit.

Click to expand...

Can we please all understand that sidereal does not = Vedic astrology? As JUPITERASC points out, there is actually a history of western astrologers using the sidereal zodiac to understand astrology without Vedic interpretations....

Yuusha said:

Well well well, now that I have discovered that there is more to astrology than the geocentric perspective (even from the geocentric perspective, I need to understand my sidereal chart better. I am pretty familiar with my tropical chart, but I don't understand my vedic sidereal chart as much), I experimented with the heliocentric perspective a bit.

I'll definitely have to get a new understanding of my birth chart from a heliocentric angle, though I'm more inclined to believe that the sidereal chart may be more accurate because I would find it really strange to only have water and earth in my chart.

Click to expand...

I don't really care how my chart looks in any system,I could be an *** sign if there was one-I don't care, I care to find the RIGHT and real method,and I know one of these methods is reaally fake,I'm just still learning which,and go through the path of elimination.

Choe said:

I don't really care how my chart looks in any system,I could be an *** sign if there was one-I don't care, I care to find the RIGHT and real method,and I know one of these methods is reaally fake,I'm just still learning which,and go through the path of elimination.

Click to expand...

Neither is really fake. They usually tell the same story in different ways.

@tsmall

Sorry about that. The first time I came across sidereal astrology was through Vedic astrology. However, I'll definitely look more into Western sidereal astrology, where the positions of the Sun, the Moon, Venus, Mars, Saturn and the Lunar Nodes are pretty similar to Vedic, but there is the added bonus of Uranus, Neptune, Pluto and the differences between the two geocentric sidereal methods in terms of planetary positions are by a degree or two.

@Choe

I think different charts can lead to similar conclusions in some ways, the challenge is to see which ones harmonize with each other the most. I was just particularly shocked by my tropical heliocentric birth chart because I usually have quite an amount of fire in my birth chart, so I'm not sure what would explain the enthusiastic side of my personality without that.

Yuusha said:

@Choe

I think different charts can lead to similar conclusions in some ways, the challenge is to see which ones harmonize with each other the most. I was just particularly shocked by my tropical heliocentric birth chart because I usually have quite an amount of fire in my birth chart, so I'm not sure what would explain the enthusiastic side of my personality without that.

Click to expand...

I know that. My geocentric chart makes more sense I think,but still there is NO LOGIC ,how can you use planets of the Solar System and say that the Sun moves around the Earth? It's imaginary astrology, not reality-based, that's what bothers me.

Yuusha said:

@tsmall

Sorry about that. The first time I came across sidereal astrology was through Vedic astrology. However, I'll definitely look more into Western sidereal astrology, where the positions of the Sun, the Moon, Venus, Mars, Saturn and the Lunar Nodes are pretty similar to Vedic, but there is the added bonus of Uranus, Neptune, Pluto and the differences between the two geocentric sidereal methods in terms of planetary positions are by a degree or two.

Click to expand...

No, I'm sorry that it seems as though I was chastizing you for a mistake I often see made. As far as sidereal...sigh...if you really start to investigate, you will find that there are more ayanamsas than the two to be found on astro.com, and that is the reason most often given for the arguement about why the sidereal zodiac is "unreliable." I think retinoid said it best...they usually tell the same story in different ways.

Just because you think a Gemini Moon fits you better does not make sidereal more accurate. You have Mercury in the first house, any of your logic surrounding that situation is biased. And what makes you think you have a Capricorn Sun? How can you even tell? Your Sun is in a sign ruled by Saturn, recieving reception, and sextiling it. Not to mention the Moon is the main luminary in your chart and isn't in aspect with your Sun.

But hey, whatever floats your boat. Enjoy all 40 degrees of Virgo! If there's one thing I can live without, it's more Virgo in my life. Oh, but you probably still use sign = 30 degrees. Because using the actual stars, of course, only relates to where Aries is, which is in itself a flawed philosophy (that is, spring = beginning so therefore Aries = beginning).

I'm far too uninterested to see how this thread degraded into an argument about point of view... but guys, really? I take a cow-centric view on astrology. I find the nearest cow and cast a horary chart from it's position.

It's not mostly about the Gemini Moon. It's mostly about which planets come up to be the most powerful in multiple types of trad. In trad, it's always Venus followed by the Moon (or vice versa) in tropical, and Mercury followed by Saturn (when it isn't more Mercury) in sidereal. In trad, I also have Jupiter and Saturn as final dispositors in reception. Not having a final dispositor(s) makes you scattered because you don't have a planet(s) you have to ask before you do something. I'm clearly quite obsessive and therefore not scattered. By the way, the Moon is out of sect according to some schools of astrology so according to them the Sun would be the main luminary on my chart. I don't really care which one it is or which planets belong to which sect seeing as no one can agree on the sects of Mercury, Venus, and Saturn (which also happen to be my favorite planets) and occasionally Mars.

Yesterday I got some great advice, although it was misquoted. I'm so loose and I have "nothing mistrustful." I also totally haven't been called "the hardest-working person [a person] know" verbatim before (even if it's not entirely true.)

Right now: Moon at 0°16' Capricorn, Sun 0°18' Aquarius-CAPRICORN

The front page describes the sun in Aquarius, but any astronomer will find the sun is in Capricorn and the moon should (it doesn't today) eclipse the sun: the moon has to be in Sagittarius approaching Capricorn later today.

Astrologically speaking, concerning the events relating to the passage of NDAA, SOPA and PIPA...and anti-government protests by the OWS and Tea Party...and finally, the anti-war demonstrations in the US about our proposed war games in the strait of Hormuz triggers a backlash with Iran: the Lunar Sagittarian-Solar Capricorn combination symbolizes a socially conscious "bad mood" by the general public against their governments.

So are you agreeing or just giving evidence?

Also, is that directed towards Uranus and a towards Saturn? Just curious. I give them both .

You're experiencing what's called Capricorn Denial Syndrome, similar to the popular Virgo Denial Syndrome.

Furthermore, you're young. The older you get, the more you begin to embody your natal chart. When you're old enough to know who you are, you should re-evaluate your chart and see how well it fits you.

Sidereal is NOT more accurate. It is as much a symbolic division of the sky as tropical. The constellations do not divvy up the heavens in thirty-degree chunks. What's more, my sidereal chart makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever (I become a Sun-Aries for starters, which is just ludicrous)

Sun-Moon aspects are way too fleeting to account for the things you describe CapAqua. You're looking at outer planetary influences there - Pluto in Capricorn, for instance.

MSO said:

You're experiencing what's called Capricorn Denial Syndrome, similar to the popular Virgo Denial Syndrome.

Click to expand...

Actually, I'm an Aquarius, but that makes no sense to me since I'm introverted, a [strikethrough]pessimist[/strikethrough] realist, and I don't exactly fit the "sanguine" descriptor from the video links in my siggie, so I want to be a Capricorn. Cold and dry just suits me better than hot and wet.

Inconjunct said:

Sidereal is NOT more accurate. It is as much a symbolic division of the sky as tropical. The constellations do not divvy up the heavens in thirty-degree chunks. What's more, my sidereal chart makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever (I become a Sun-Aries for starters, which is just ludicrous)

Click to expand...

Why should the equinoxes and solstices divvy up the heavens in thirty-degree chunks? I can point to constellations. I can some-what point to equinoxes and solstices, but I can't divide the sky into 12 based on them, or at least I can't say that those twelvefold are real objects under the name Capricorn, Aquarius, etc. Astronomers would laugh. Why should those 30-degree chunks based on equinox and solstice points even have any influence in the first place? I'm getting to know myself. I know that I'm a terrible Aquarius because I'm just so sanguine [/sarcasm] and I'm also a terrible Cancer because I'd rather be alone than be close to people. I would still be a terrible Gemini because I don't talk enough. I'm not scattered or a lazy bum (the Moon and Venus are lazy bums at best) like my tropical chart suggests, and the use of both of my malefics is generally beneficial to me. While we're on malefics, a dude I know has Mars in Scorpio as his final dispositor and he can't keep a secret. He has Saturn in Taurus and he can't hang onto money for his life (no offense to him.)

Edit: Cancer Moons and Aqua Suns are supposed to have really light and jovial dispositons. Do either of those signs like scary or heavy things, like I use in my arts all the time? I don't think so, but I could be wrong... Of course I'm a (my final dispositors.) = the darkest sign, = the most creative sign.

Choe said:

It's imaginary astrology, not reality-based, that's what bothers me.

Click to expand...

Isn't all astrology imaginary?