CancerEvolve
Banned
You are welcome would you like a tofee?
By Sign Or By Orb?
- Thread starter Osamenor
- Start date
CancerEvolve
Banned
Does a square become trine?
AppLeo
Well-known member
CancerEvolve
Banned
Other than abusing each others ego's it's on topic and I'm jesting.
aquarius7000
Well-known member
Trines are the easiest because they are formed between planets in signs that naturally trine one another due to the due to the same energy. Ever studied a trine in astrology? It is between planets in one water sign to planets in another water sign. Same for all other elements. From air to air. That is the logic in astrology.
[deleted attacking comment - Moderator]
[deleted attacking comment - Moderator]
Last edited by a moderator:
Why would you say that Astrology was not angle based and not geometry or math?
[deleted attacking comment - Moderator]
Last edited by a moderator:
Astrodynes
The measurement of astral-force
Astrology, mathematics and measurement
http://astrologyforaquarius.com/astrodynes/astrology-mathematics-and-measurement/
Your birthchart is a mathematical model of your character and the rules of astrology allow you to precisely calculate and forecast your character’s reaction to circumstance
In mathematics, especially geometry, the birthchart is a dynamic moving structure. The planets have become mathematical points in space and the zodiac has become a mathematical framework and your birthchart has become a mathematical pattern of your character, the only blueprint of your mind and temperament that’s currently available. This means that the planets and signs in your chart symbolize forces within your mind and the application of numbers and mathematical rules – applied mathematics – allows you to solve the most intangible and elusive problems regarding your human nature.
Mathematics is the master-key of Aquarian Age science. It’s essential to all the sciences. From the scientific angle the key point is measurement, and astrology, in order to gain recognition as a science, had to be dealt with in terms that correspond to mathematical formulae. So, Hermetic astrology developed a method for measuring the strength and functionality of each individual marker in any birthchart. That’s when mathematics and astrology became a dynamic combination, but mathematics can’t prove or disprove astrology.
Astrology is surprisingly mathematical. Numbers permit the accurate measurement of the astrological energies pictured in any birthchart and now they have revolutionized the way the birthchart is assessed and understood. Mathematics is central to problem solving and problem solving is central to your life experience, and the application of numbers will assist you to solve problems and self-develop in the most effective way.
The measurement of astral-force
Astrology, mathematics and measurement
http://astrologyforaquarius.com/astrodynes/astrology-mathematics-and-measurement/
Your birthchart is a mathematical model of your character and the rules of astrology allow you to precisely calculate and forecast your character’s reaction to circumstance
In mathematics, especially geometry, the birthchart is a dynamic moving structure. The planets have become mathematical points in space and the zodiac has become a mathematical framework and your birthchart has become a mathematical pattern of your character, the only blueprint of your mind and temperament that’s currently available. This means that the planets and signs in your chart symbolize forces within your mind and the application of numbers and mathematical rules – applied mathematics – allows you to solve the most intangible and elusive problems regarding your human nature.
Mathematics is the master-key of Aquarian Age science. It’s essential to all the sciences. From the scientific angle the key point is measurement, and astrology, in order to gain recognition as a science, had to be dealt with in terms that correspond to mathematical formulae. So, Hermetic astrology developed a method for measuring the strength and functionality of each individual marker in any birthchart. That’s when mathematics and astrology became a dynamic combination, but mathematics can’t prove or disprove astrology.
Astrology is surprisingly mathematical. Numbers permit the accurate measurement of the astrological energies pictured in any birthchart and now they have revolutionized the way the birthchart is assessed and understood. Mathematics is central to problem solving and problem solving is central to your life experience, and the application of numbers will assist you to solve problems and self-develop in the most effective way.
Last edited:
Frisiangal
Well-known member
My FIXED sign 9th house Sun square Jupiter can say the same.
It's still searching for the Holy Grail, which only my favourite film idol, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, appeared to have found....and lost.
This sounded very like the sort of comment a Jupiter in Taurus could make.
.
This is a comment I have heard a number of times from those who ventured into traditional astrology, and even taught it. Yet, when I questioned their denial of the outer planets that ARE physically part of the solar system, none was able to offer an answer. I'm all for ignoring that which isn't physically there, but how is it possible to close one's eyes to that which is?
A reason that I believe the outers refer to levels of conscious growth (inspired by the Jupiter-9th house thing), and why my own out of orb
Saturn-Neptune goes so slowly about it.
Doesn't the highlighted reveal that it was through and/or as a result of personal experience that the seed was planted for the manner in which the mind (further) worked? I was taught and totally agree that Mars has rulership of Scorpio in youth, and under influence of Moon. Yet there does come a time when self assertion and will undergo an 'extra boost', as it were, in which the cutting away of old habitual roots is necessary. Does Jupiter provide that, or simply pave the way?
This is interesting to philosophise about because my son also has an out of sign Moon end Virgo closely conjunct Pluto begin Libra (ex-wife's Sun)in 7th house. It squares Jupiter end Sagittarius in 11th house, and trines Saturn in 3rd house. She is from a financially independent wealthy family and ruled the proverbial marriage roost. She betrayed his total trust in their relationship. He went through a for him almost self destructive and traumatic divorce that left him penniless.
His 2nd house Mars in Aries makes but one aspect to Uranus in the 8th house! Can Mars go as far as experiencing, yet not self destructing?
Was it all due to a traditional Moon, ruler 6th house, square Jupiter and trine Saturn? OR, did he have to go through such an experience to become the self-assertive and independent individual he now is ........the outer planet 'conscious raising' effect to his natal planets? Did Uranus take over from Saturn as ruler Aquarius Asc. and 1st house Sun?
Without delving deeply into the rules of the traditional approach to astrological interpretation, I do admit that looking at circumstances from the inherent qualities of the 7 trad. planets can provide alternate perspectives of them; Rather like looking at an object from each point within an outer circle.
Once again, I think this would depend upon the level of consciousness of an individual and their feelings towards their physical existence.
sibylline
Well-known member
No doubt it is a different quality square but from my experience is still a square. I have a couple of these tight orb out of sign squares and you could take any textbook description of these squares and it would apply. The fact that they are sextile by sign (and in one case, disposes the other) seems to make it more exaggerated, actually, it's like they feed each other. With these aspects the planets themselves are what I concern myself with, not the signs. The Sun square Saturn denotes something about the personality, life, etc, regardless of sign.
aquarius7000
Well-known member
Katydid,
First and foremost, I said nowhere that I did not use aspects. What I did say "was that sign energies go before aspects".
I do NOT consider 'out-of-sign' aspects at all, not even if they are as close 29*55" and 0*5". Does that example help when I say that sign energies go before aspects?
Last edited:
aquarius7000
Well-known member
Hi,
Fair enough, since your Sun is fixed, too, you perhaps understand what I said.
And I don't have it
I truly hope that you read the rest of my text that you did not include in the quote. I said I do not use (after having enough convincing reason not to) the outers as sign rulers, BUT I do use them if they are in tight orbs with inner planets or if they are sitting on angles.
Mars, after letting go of self-assertion with increasing age takes over battles of the self and assertion of the self in other areas of life. For instance, when we grow older, we could develop a physical ailment and Mars will help us fight it. Or one may lose one's job and again Mars will help us fight thru that depression and give us the gusto to look for another one. These are just a few examples. However, my point is that Mars, as far as I am concerned, remains the ruler of Scorpio, regardless of the native's age.
And, that is what I keep requesting - to have the natal chart in front of me, instead one or two thing's from the native's life and those explained through just your own perspective, using out-of-sign aspects. If I don't have the chart in front of me, no matter how clearly you may have explained things, I will refrain from commenting because I do not have the whole picture to glean from. Thanks
Frisiangal
Well-known member
I don't see the difference between 'just your own persepctive' in using out of sign aspects compared to those who do the same using traditional rules.
But that's just me.
The subject is not about gleaning the whole picture from a chart, it is about any difference in strength of a specific planetary aspect (and rulership) from the traditional versus modern perspective.
Is it not possible for traditional astrologers 'to visualise' any aspect in their heads, or to draw a small circle that encompasses the aspect queried, and gain imaginative insight through those means?
I was genuinely interested in reading your replies to my queries. You made some points that, in my simple manner, got me thinking further through an alternate astrological focus that could be applied. Unfortunately, it failed to provide an answer that you would say through lack of knowledge, and
proved to be attainable from use of the modern planets.
I would have liked to include my son's chart for delineation but I have written so much about his circumstances in life, that I feel that any p.o.v would be tinted through knowledge already gained and not from an unwritten page.
The season's greetings to you and still more astrological insight is wished during 2018.
Frisiangal
Well-known member
Taking the subject of out of sign aspects a little further, does anyone use sign decanates to gain more insight into the aspect? I thanked a member of this community recently who showed an astro. com chart with the traditional decans included. An immediate glance provides a further
'colouring' to a planet's working function.
Using my own out of sign Saturn square Neptune as an example.
Saturn in Gemini is in the 3rd decanate, that falls under Aquarius. So Saturn doesn't represent just a serious thinker in all sense of the words, it also takes in it's traditional versus a modern sign rulership quality..... and Uranus is in the first Gemini decanate of Gemini!!!
Neptune is in the first decanate of Libra, so there's a double Venus-ruled quality about its reference.
Comparing and defining in mental thought (air) the illusive from the reality has always been an ongoing part of character. Luckily, with both sign rulers in Taurus, the facts provide the solution.
Obviously decanate influence plays its part in all aspects but am wondering how/whether others experience the out of sign references.
'colouring' to a planet's working function.
Using my own out of sign Saturn square Neptune as an example.
Saturn in Gemini is in the 3rd decanate, that falls under Aquarius. So Saturn doesn't represent just a serious thinker in all sense of the words, it also takes in it's traditional versus a modern sign rulership quality..... and Uranus is in the first Gemini decanate of Gemini!!!
Neptune is in the first decanate of Libra, so there's a double Venus-ruled quality about its reference.
Comparing and defining in mental thought (air) the illusive from the reality has always been an ongoing part of character. Luckily, with both sign rulers in Taurus, the facts provide the solution.
Obviously decanate influence plays its part in all aspects but am wondering how/whether others experience the out of sign references.
aquarius7000
Well-known member
You know traditional astrologers that use out-of-sign aspects?
Did I talk about "visualising" aspects? Perhaps it may be getting confusing for you because some others here on this thread are talking about "visual" planets, etc. What I said was that I do not like to comment on just one constellation without seeing the whole chart and just based on just the one or two aspects you mention (because that mentioning/interp is from your own perspective)
Last edited:
You are not saying that 'sign energies go before aspects', from what I can see. It seems that you are saying that 'sign energies are the ONLY energies that matter, and the mathematical aspects are not taken into account at all. '
In other words, if the aspect of a square, which BY DEFINITION, is a 90 degree arc, is not considered to be a square, by your theory, then you are totally counting signs as the only important factor.
By the way, there are many astrologers that agree with me, that 2 planets, what are in square aspect, even if out of sign, are still considered to be in a square aspect.
Last edited by a moderator:
aquarius7000
Well-known member
What you choose to not take into consideration is the fact that we are not talking about pure mathematics. We are talking about Astrology, where we first take into consideration the signs, their rulers, planets in those signs and houses and THEN aspects because without signs, houses and planets, there would be NO aspects.
Now, 2nd point to consider, when we do consider signs and planets, we consider which planet is placed in which sign because that is how we know whether it is strong or weak.
3rd consideration, it is because of that strength or weakness that it gets its power to act. Next we consider its house placement. And then come the aspects.
Pretty basic and something I learnt in Astrology when I started out. But always good to revise.
Last edited by a moderator:
But you have already said that no matter what planets, or what houses, or what strength, no matter what circumstances, if the aspect is 'out of sign', you do not count it as that aspect.
And I continue to question that rule because I disagree with the concept.
Last edited by a moderator:
aquarius7000
Well-known member
I consider signs and their strengths that I do not find 'out-of-sign' aspects to work.
Let me again give and example: Planets in Taurus and Aquarius can never be trine in my books because the energies of the signs Aquarius and Taurus are in stress or square with eachother. So, planets in both those signs, no matter how close the aspects, cannot build a trine to one another because the two signs (with or without planets in them) are at loggerheads/ stressed/ square (can't think of more synonyms) with eachother. Let me know if you need more examples and me to repeat the consideration of energies of signs.
I have repeatedly been stating that sign energies come before aspects,
but that part has been overlooked.,
Last edited:
Here is a quote from you, upthread:
"Think beyond those random lines and consider that the sign energies are much more important and have a real logic to them, which gives an astrologer a fundament to work with. Since Taurus and Cancerian energies trine each other, earth and water like each other to put it in simple language, planets in these signs cannot square each other."
__________________
Here^^^ is what I fundamentally disagree with. You say, very clearly and absolutely, that 'planets in Taurus and Cancer CANNOT square each other.'
The problem is, that is NOT TRUE. A planet in Taurus can and does square a planet in Cancer, whenever they reach an orb near 90 degrees arc. It happens quite often.
So that is a false statement, that 2 planets in those signs cannot be in a square aspect. The definition of a square is a mathematical one.
Now you may have philosophical or theoretical differences with that definition, but it does not change the facts.
I totally understand your argument that Taurus and Cancer are sympathetic elements, not USUALLY in squaring aspects. So a square between them will work differently from a Fire/Earth square would.
And we can discuss that and agree upon that.
But I have a problem with the cut and dry, absolute denial that the square aspect even exists. That is problematic to me, perhaps, because it is indicative of other aspects of traditional theories.
"Think beyond those random lines and consider that the sign energies are much more important and have a real logic to them, which gives an astrologer a fundament to work with. Since Taurus and Cancerian energies trine each other, earth and water like each other to put it in simple language, planets in these signs cannot square each other."
__________________
Here^^^ is what I fundamentally disagree with. You say, very clearly and absolutely, that 'planets in Taurus and Cancer CANNOT square each other.'
The problem is, that is NOT TRUE. A planet in Taurus can and does square a planet in Cancer, whenever they reach an orb near 90 degrees arc. It happens quite often.
So that is a false statement, that 2 planets in those signs cannot be in a square aspect. The definition of a square is a mathematical one.
Now you may have philosophical or theoretical differences with that definition, but it does not change the facts.
I totally understand your argument that Taurus and Cancer are sympathetic elements, not USUALLY in squaring aspects. So a square between them will work differently from a Fire/Earth square would.
And we can discuss that and agree upon that.
But I have a problem with the cut and dry, absolute denial that the square aspect even exists. That is problematic to me, perhaps, because it is indicative of other aspects of traditional theories.
Okay, as you asked, here is where you make that absolute statement:
Since Taurus and Cancerian energies trine each other, earth and water like each other to put it in simple language, planets in these signs cannot square each other
But the problem with the above statement is that THEY DO square each other whenever they are 90 degrees apart.