skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Dominique Strauss Kann Solar Return accounts for Precession

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Nativities & General Astrology
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Steve



Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 261

Posted: Fri May 20, 2011 2:45 pm    Post subject: Dominique Strauss Kann Solar Return accounts for Precession Reply with quote

Dominique Strauss-Kahn (DSK) of France, (former) head of the International Monetary Fund resigned today, which was expected after being arrested a few days ago for rape of a Hotel Maid in New York City.

Birth Data: “Paddy de Jabrun quotes birth certificate”, Roden Rating AA, Astro Databank.
April 25th 1949, 11:10 AM, Neuilly –sur Seine, France, 48N53, 2E16.

One of the most reliable teachings I have learned about Solar Returns that account for Precession, comes from Jim Eshelman’s book ‘Interpreting Solar Returns’ where Jim states:

Quote:
Partile aspects (1 degree orb or less) reign supreme. Aspects at this high (partile) level of potency are apt to manifest no matter what. It is when angularity and aspect partility coincide that outstanding incidents are most likely to come about.


Partile angular aspects in a Solar Return will completely dominate the major theme for a Solar year. Since DSK is in his sixties we will compute his Natal & Solar Return in the Sidereal Zodiac to get more accurate astronomical coordinates for any natal placements. This is also important when accurately calculating partile aspects or Paran aspects involving Natal or Progressed planets. A partile angular aspect in a Solar Return is definitely not a random astronomical event. It takes some precise celestial mechanics for this astronomical event to occur. The astrologer does not want to ignore an angular partile aspect in a Solar Return of a client, family member, friend or the astrologer. Below is a bi-wheel with DSK Solar Return on the inside and his natal on the outside. DSK 2011 relocated SR to New York is in definite collusion (BIG TIME!) with his Natal Saturn and his Secondary Progressed (SP) Natal Saturn. Note DSK Solar (transiting) Neptune is in partile 180 to DSK Natal Neptune ecliptically and is 3 degrees fro the Solar ASC/DSC axis. Jim’s book clearly/emphatically teaches the astrologer this SR will produce an ‘outstanding incident’ pertaining to the symbolism of Neptune-Saturn. The astrologer does not know what circumstances will produce this ‘outstanding incident’ only that this SR is shouting there is going to be a malefic Natal Saturn incident involved with Solar transiting Neptune. But there is a much more potent Saturn-Neptune effect hidden from the astrologers chart eyes, involving DSK Solar (transiting) Neptune and DSK SP Natal Saturn. This Solar Neptune and Natal SP Saturn is in Paran configuration. Cyril Fagan states about Paran Configurations:

Quote:
“When two or more planets are simultaneously on the same, adjacent or opposite angles they are said to be in paranatellonta (Paran). This is the most powerful of all configurations.”


It takes extra work for the astrologer to identify Paran configurations because in most cases our eyes can’t actually see the Paran configuration on conventional computed charts. Looking at DSK 2011 SR our eyes see DSK Solar (transiting) Neptune at 5AQ38 with DSK SR ASC at 8AQ38. But our eyes deceives us, the actual astronomical position of DSK Solar (transiting) Neptune is partile conjunct DSK SR ASC at the time of DSK SR in New York City. DSK SR ASC precisely rises at a sidereal time of 16:57:28. DSK SR (transiting) Neptune rises with a sidereal time of 16:52:25. DSK Secondary Progressed Natal Saturn Sets with a sidereal time of 17:01:21. Any sidereal time under 8 minutes constitutes a Paran configuration with planets and angles. It should also be understood that Parans are very latitude sensitive. DSK had to be on a latitude line going through New York City to have this t. Neptune- sp Natal Saturn Paran. This is frigging astounding when we ponder the astronomical fact DSK had to travel to New York from France to configure this Paran configuration and the angular partile 180 ecliptic hit of t. Neptune n. Saturn. How in the world can a fate put this man in the wrong place at the wrong time to synchronize this ‘outstanding incident’ involving the natural law of astronomy and the symbolism of the planets involved. This simply puts me in a sheer state of awe but I see this state of awe all the time with Solar Returns that account for Precession. If the astrologer does not account for Precession with this SR or account for re- location to NY, all of this above symbolism goes away—the SR would not collude with DSK Natal Saturn with transiting (SR) Neptune. Precession is a critical factor for the serious astrologer to implement/understand. Donald Bradely, probably the hardest working researcher ever with Solar Returns that accounts for Precession and Eshelman’s mentor wrote this pertaining to Saturn-Neptune symbolism when found angular in return charts that account for precession:

Quote:
“A real throne-toppler, this configuration. Among its paramount keywords is “removal,” for Saturn-Neptune surely takes first prize for forcing resignations, abdications, exiles, deportations, and firings from jobs.”


Also it is very interesting to note transiting Saturn was tight conjunct DSK Natal Neptune. What we have here is a huge triple whammy of Saturn-Neptune symbolism with DSK. Simply amazing to my mind.



S
_________________
With all our modern knowledge and scientific equipment, and with the the great strides made in mathematics, we astrologers have done nothing to even remotely compare with the achievements of the astrologers of antiquity. Cyril Fagan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
horarcek



Joined: 24 Jul 2005
Posts: 149
Location: Slovenia

Posted: Sat May 21, 2011 7:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Steve,

great explanation Thumbs up
But is it possible to get some words about DSK`s PSR in the way you`ve been teaching us - tropical natal chart and precessed solar return?

Greetings,
Trojan
_________________
Reges Subjucent Legibus Stellarum
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steve



Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 261

Posted: Sat May 21, 2011 1:16 pm    Post subject: DSK SR WITH/WITHOUT CORRECTING FOR PRECESSION Reply with quote

Trojan wrote and asked:
Quote:
But is it possible to get some words about DSK`s PSR in the way you`ve been teaching us - tropical natal chart and precessed solar return?


Below is DSK’S bi-wheel computed with the tropical zodiac. The inside wheel is DSK’S Precession Corrected Solar Return—outside wheel Tropical Natal Chart. We have to correct for precession in the tropical zodiac since the tropical zodiac does not account for precession. The Sidereal zodiac accounts for precession so there is no need to correct for precession. If you will compare the two bi-wheels, one computed in the sidereal zodiac (see in original post) and the other computed in the tropical zodiac (see in this post), you will note the mundane structure (positions of the planets on the wheels) of both bi-wheels are the same. The important angular planets are basically in the same position. The only difference is the difference in degree placement between the two zodiacs (but with Eshelman's SR analysis we don't concern ourselves with signs). But there are some other subtle differences. In the tropical zodiac (see next bi-wheel below) Natal Saturn is 29Leo21 and Solar Return Neptune is 0Pi32—this is not a partile (under one degree) 180 aspect. Whereas, in the Sidereal zodiac (see bi-wheel in orginal post) Natal Saturn is 05Leo19 and Solar Return Neptune is 05Aqu38 which is a partile (under 1 degree) 180 aspect. Natal positions should be adjusted for the motion of precession as time passes. In 72 years this would account for app. 1 degree. Also note the difference is the degree of the Sun’s. In the bi wheel using the Sidereal zodiac (see bi-wheel in original post) the Natal Sun is at 10Air50 and the Solar Return Sun is also at 10Air50. In the bi-wheel using the tropical zodiac (see next bi-wheel below) the Natal Sun is at 04Tau52 but the Solar Return Sun is at 05Tau44—this is the computer adjusting the Sun’s position for precession in the tropical zodiac in order to to get the correct clock time for the true Solar Return.



The main thing to understand when it comes to seeing on the chart ‘outstanding incidents’-- is in order to get the correct CLOCK TIME using the tropical zodiac to compute when the Sun precisely returns to the same position relative to the fixed stars behind our Sun-- is a correction for precession must be made. If we don’t correct for precession we get the wrong CLOCK TIME to compute the Solar Return- which gives us the wrong angles and the wrong Moon position. To demonstrate this I will compute another bi-wheel (see last bi-wheel below) in the tropical zodiac without correcting for precession. Without correcting for Precession in the tropical zodiac we loose the all important angular placements of DSK SR Neptune 180 DSK Natal Saturn. Go back and compare the last below bi-wheel without correcting for Precession in the tropical zodiac with the above bi-wheel correcting for precession in the tropical zodiac. Also note the difference in CLOCK TIME between the two Solar Returns. Also note the difference in Solar Return Moons with the two Solar Returns. Also note there is no Paran configuration in New York without correcting for precession with this last bi-wheel below.



Steve
_________________
With all our modern knowledge and scientific equipment, and with the the great strides made in mathematics, we astrologers have done nothing to even remotely compare with the achievements of the astrologers of antiquity. Cyril Fagan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Juan



Joined: 21 May 2007
Posts: 214
Location: San José, Costa Rica

Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 12:30 am    Post subject: Re: DSK SR WITH/WITHOUT CORRECTING FOR PRECESSION Reply with quote

Steve wrote:
Natal positions should be adjusted for the motion of precession as time passes.

In a precession-corrected reference frame, the natal is the radix, so the natal tropical positions are considered sidereal-fixed and should not be corrected, it is the transits to this radix including the solar return positions that must be corrected, subtracting from them the accumulated precession from birth.


Quote:
In the bi-wheel using the tropical zodiac (see next bi-wheel below) the Natal Sun is at 04Tau52 but the Solar Return Sun is at 05Tau44—this is the computer adjusting the Sun’s position for precession in the tropical zodiac in order to to get the correct clock time for the true Solar Return.

Actually what this shows is that the computer (the programmer) is erroneously NOT adjusting the positions for precession, it is accounting for precession only in the calculation of the time of the return but not in the positions, and this produces a cumulative error at the rate of 1 degree for every 72 years of life when comparing the positions of the return (or of any other transit) with those of the natal.

Juan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steve



Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 261

Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 2:21 pm    Post subject: Solar Fire Calculation Process of Solar Returns Reply with quote

Juan wrote:
Quote:
Actually what this shows is that the computer (the programmer) is erroneously NOT adjusting the positions for precession, it is accounting for precession only in the calculation of the time of the return but not in the positions, and this produces a cumulative error at the rate of 1 degree for every 72 years of life when comparing the positions of the return (or of any other transit) with those of the natal.


Yes, I understand. The way the programmer programmed Solar Fire for precession corrected Solar Returns in the Tropical zodiac, produces a ‘cumulative error at the rate of 1 degree for every 72 years of life when comparing the positions’ of the precession corrected solar return in the tropical zodiac with Natal positions. But, the way the Solar Fire programmer set up his program computes the same clock time (3:37:38 EDT) for the precession corrected solar return in the tropical zodiac as the solar return in the sidereal zodiac—which from an astronomical standpoint is accurately returning our Tropical Natal Sun’s to a true correct astronomical return position relative to the fixed stars behind our Solar Sun’s. I think this is the correct way of stating this for this discussion but I am not the astronomer you are. The programmer of Solar Fire allows the astrologer using the tropical zodiac to get the accurate (same) mundane (wheel) positions of the angles as the astrologer using the sidereal zodiac, when computing Return charts corrected for precession in the tropical zodiac. Also allows for the same mundane (wheel) position for the Solar Moon. Correct mundane positions of the Solar angles and Solar Moon are the critical issues when computing Return Charts in order to see the planetary symbolism for ‘outstanding incidents’. This is what I was demonstrating in response to Trojan’s post with Dominique Strauss Kahn’s current solar return computed as a precession corrected solar return in the tropical zodiac verses the sidereal zodiac—the mundane position of the angles (wheel) are the same. Whereas, if precession is not accounted for in the tropical zodiac, the mundane position of the angles (wheel) is not the same; because, the clock time (6:07:07 AM) of the tropical solar return without accounting for precession is not the same as the tropical return corrected for precession, or the sidereal return accounting for precession. Without the correct mundane positions of the SR angles in the tropical zodiac corrected for precession, or the same correct mundane positions of the angles in the sidereal zodiac accounting for precession, the critical delineation of the angular Saturn-Neptune symbolism (Bradley’s angular resignation/firing delineation) goes away-- because this Saturn-Neptune symbolism want be angular in a standard solar return that does not account for precession. I originally used the sidereal zodiac in this thread because I knew the natal position of DSK’s Natal Saturn in the bi-wheel would be more accurate than his natal Saturn position in the bi-wheel of the tropical zodiac corrected for precession. The reason for this is because DSK is in his 60’s closer to age 72; which, as you pointed out, produces a ‘cumulative error at the rate of 1 degree for every 72 years of life when comparing the positions of the return (chart) with those of the natal’. The sidereal bi-wheel proves the partile 180 of Solar Neptune to DSK Natal Saturn. The bi-wheel of the precession corrected Solar Return proves DSK’s Solar Neptune is not 180 partile to his Natal Saturn, hence this ‘cumulative error of 1 degree for every 72 years of life.’ This is splitting hairs but still reflects accurate astronomy. The main point to understand is we must account for precession in order to astronomically accurately compute a true Return chart with accurate clock time.

S
_________________
With all our modern knowledge and scientific equipment, and with the the great strides made in mathematics, we astrologers have done nothing to even remotely compare with the achievements of the astrologers of antiquity. Cyril Fagan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Juan



Joined: 21 May 2007
Posts: 214
Location: San José, Costa Rica

Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 4:39 pm    Post subject: Re: Solar Fire Calculation Process of Solar Returns Reply with quote

Solar Fire is giving you simply the tropical chart of the time of the sidereal return, and this means that two different zero points are being used at the same time: one for the natal, and a different one for the positions in the return.

This was the subject of a recent discussion here in this forum with Mark, and I would like to clarify that this is not what I meant by a "precession-corrected" solar return or transit in that discussion. A precession-corrected chart or transit is a different concept.

I know this is not your fault, Steve. I just want to point out to the --sadly-- prevalent confusion among tropical and sidereal astrologers alike created by this astronomically meaningless practice, in my opinion rightly condemned by Mark, by the programmers at Astrodienst, and by many others.

Juan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steve



Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 261

Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 9:40 pm    Post subject: Solar Fire/Solar Returns Reply with quote

Juan wrote:
Quote:
I just want to point out to the --sadly-- prevalent confusion among tropical and sidereal astrologers alike created by this astronomically meaningless practice, in my opinion rightly condemned by Mark, by the programmers at Astrodienst, and by many others.


I understand your point-- except I don’t completely agree with you if you mean the programmer for Solar Fire is performing an ‘astronomically meaningless practice.’ I understand if the programmer of SF may be erronious with his astronomical concepts. But IMO, the programmer of Solar Fire is performing a very important COICE for astrologers with a labeled ‘precession corrected Solar Return’ with the tropical zodiac verses computing a SR in the sidereal zodiac. Otherwise, the astrologer would have no choice but to compute the Solar Return in the sidereal zodiac in order to get the astronomy correct to cast the SR chart. I think the ‘prevalent confusion’ among astrologers today using solar returns in the tropical zodiac-- is casting solar returns not correcting for precession, which allows an error with positional or orbiting astronomy with a SR. Most astrologers don’t realize without correcting for precession in the tropical zodiac, one is not astronomically computing an accurate TIMED Solar Return. You do agree the programmer for Solar Fire is offering the astrologer using the tropical zodiac a CHOICE, with the somewhat erroneous label ‘precession corrected solar return,’ a way to compute the correct time for a solar return in the tropical zodiac instead of using the sidereal zodiac —do we agree on this point? I think this Choice is important because 98% of today’s astrologers work in the tropical zodiac. Astrodienst doesn’t even allow this CHOICE, as well as other astrological programs.

There is not anything we non-programmer astrologers can do about the various nuances/ errors of various programmers pertaining to correct orbital timed Solar Returns. My main point/interest as an astrologer is to get the correct mundane positions of the angles and correct mundane solar Moon position with a solar return correcting for precession in the tropical zodiac, a correct timed SR. I understand this word ‘correcting’ for precession in the tropical zodiac is offensive to your astronomical mind but most astrologers don’t comprehend correct orbital astronomy as your mind. It does not matter to me what/how the programmer is doing with a programmer procedure in order to get these correct SR mundane positions of the angles, as long as the orbital astronomy is correct. When I do sign interpretations, which is very little, I use the tropical zodiac but at the same time understand the sidereal zodiac requires no correction for precession. And when I am illustrating an accurate astronomical SR, I use precession corrected solar returns in the tropical zodiac because 98% of astrologers use the tropical zodiac. I have not seen any evidence from ancient sources that proves to me the sidereal zodiac is the correct zodiac to use for sign/constellations interpretations; but, I have seen plenty of evidence the sidereal zodiac offers a purer astronomy from an orbital basis, and IMO this is why the ancients measured their longitudes with the fixed stars instead of the seasonal tropical point of the spring equinox. I think the siderealist uncovered this same evidence, but this re-discovery of the sidereal zodiac, which by ancient history was the original zodiac created a huge debatable fire storm from a modern day cultural standpoint with astrologer’s exclusive use of the tropical zodiac. Since I use Solar Fire all the time when casting Solar Returns, I can’t help if the Solar Fire programmer has miss-labeled a choice for casting a Solar Return as a ‘precession corrected Solar Return.’ All I know is this Solar Fire labeled ‘precession corrected solar return’ is computing correct orbital astronomy in order to get a clock time for correct angles. I have discovered when I demonstrate a precession corrected SR in the tropical zodiac using Solar Fire with an astrologer who uses the sidereal zodiac-- it irritates them fiercely, so I just switch to the sidereal zodiac for any of my Solar Return demonstrations with an astrologer who uses the sidereal zodiac. It is no big deal to me because I know either Solar Return I am demonstrating is accurately computed with correct orbital astronomy, IMO,—to get correct angles. I will never understand the astronomy you correctly understand. All I really know is when I use Solar Fire, computing a corrected precessed solar return in the tropical zodiac, computes for me the same mundane orbital structure of the chart wheel when I compute the same solar return in the sidereal zodiac. This is all I was trying to demonstrate to Trojan with his post and question. I know Trojan uses Solar Fire. I was not trying to start an astronomical or zodiac debate. I was just trying to demonstrate a point with the use of Solar Fire pertaining to SF 3 choices for computing Solar Returns with DSK current solar return, because in my mind, DSK current SR, relocated to NY, has some outstanding (proven) angular symbolism, which explains in an important astrological context why he resigned at this time in NY. Two of SF choices with computing Solar Returns explains this outstanding angular astrological/astronomical symbolism but the 3rd choice (standard solar return) does not explain this outstanding angular symbolism.

Regards, Steve
_________________
With all our modern knowledge and scientific equipment, and with the the great strides made in mathematics, we astrologers have done nothing to even remotely compare with the achievements of the astrologers of antiquity. Cyril Fagan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Nativities & General Astrology All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated