Sun near Ascendant

1
Hello everyone,

how "far" the Sun has to/can be from the Ascendant, in order to be considered, traditionally, diurnal in a chart?
Do these "measures" have to do with the number of degrees of combustion (8?30') and under the sunbeams (17? ? I know the number of degrees can vary)?
I am studying a natal chart where the Asc is at 26?45' Aries and the Sun is at 08?08' Taurus and just cannot decide the sect, hayz and everything related to diurnality/nocturnality.

Thanks for your thoughts

Iris

2
The Sun must be above the horizon for it to be diurnal. The positions you describe show the Sun about 12 degrees below the horizon. It's a nocturnal chart. There is no orb. Above is diurnal. Below is nocturnal.

3
Keep in mind that Sun conjunct ascendant is not the same as sunrise due to atmospheric refraction. The time of sunrise and sunset will determine whether a chart is diurnal or nocturnal, not whether it is above or below the ascendant - descendant axis. The Sun can be more than a degree below the ascendant and still be diurnal.
Curtis Manwaring
Zoidiasoft Technologies, LLC

4
The Sun close to the ascendant is on the cusp, but for us to determine whether it is a day/night chart, a day chart is one where the Sun is in the southern hemisphere, above the horizon line, while night is vice versa.

The Asc at 26?45' Aries is, roughly, 11 degrees away from the Sn at 08?08' Taurus, which means that the Sun is below the horizon line, making it a night chart. The Sun is never in sect, nor the Asc and I am not familiar with the term Hayz so, Iris, I'm afraid I cannot answer this part - perhaps Thomas can?

5
zoidsoft wrote:Keep in mind that Sun conjunct ascendant is not the same as sunrise due to atmospheric refraction. The time of sunrise and sunset will determine whether a chart is diurnal or nocturnal, not whether it is above or below the ascendant - descendant axis. The Sun can be more than a degree below the ascendant and still be diurnal.
Is not the traditional - astrological - defnition of night and day that by the position of the Sun being below or above the true horizon, signified by the AC-DC Axis?

6
johannes susato wrote:
zoidsoft wrote:Keep in mind that Sun conjunct ascendant is not the same as sunrise due to atmospheric refraction. The time of sunrise and sunset will determine whether a chart is diurnal or nocturnal, not whether it is above or below the ascendant - descendant axis. The Sun can be more than a degree below the ascendant and still be diurnal.
Is not the traditional - astrological - defnition of night and day that by the position of the Sun being below or above the true horizon, signified by the AC-DC Axis?
Did the ancients understand atmospheric refraction? I would assume that they probably went with whether it was daylight or not which the start of daylight is not the same as Sun conjunct the ascendant, but the Sun's disk will be about a degree (+/-) above the eastern horizon when it is exactly on the ascendant. You might try experimenting here to understand the affect of atmospheric refraction:

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/grad/solcalc/sunrise.html

You will notice that there is typically a difference of a few minutes between Sun on the ascendant and apparent sunrise.
Curtis Manwaring
Zoidiasoft Technologies, LLC

7
Hello everyone,

I asked the question because I had always thought that the below/above the horizon distinction was clear enough, until I learnt there are certain differences.
Maybe I was also misled by my own understanding of the term "light", as there is visibile "light" (enough to see clearly) in the morning before the disk of the Sun actually appears on the (unobstructed) horizon.
Anyway, considering only atmospheric refraction, there are about five minutes (of the hour) difference between the officially given sunrise time and the Sun conjunct the Ascendant and (even assuming there is some imprecision in the calculation) that would not allow the Sun in the chart in question to be above the horizon.

Thank you all

Iris

8
"Light" can and often does mean just what it says: the stuff that comes from the Sun that illuminates everything it touches. But there is another concept: in Genesis, God says, "Let there be light." Yet the Sun wasn't created for a few more days. This kind of light, the kind caricatured with a light bulb going off above a cartoon character's head, can also be what is meant.

However "diurnal" is a different word than "light." It means "of the day," and "the day" is defined as the time the Sun is above the horizon. The hair splitting about when this actually occurs rarely affects a chart. It can, but I've never seen one where it was a problem. The example given in the question was about the Sun being 12 degrees, or roughly 48 minutes of clock time, before sunrise. That isn't close enough to be considered as anything but a nocturnal chart.

9
Hello Tom,

I understand what "diurnal" means and in fact my association line was light-daylight-day chart. And this made me ask if the distance inside which planets are burnt could be the distance inside which the Sun counts as starting "touching" the Ascendant. Too much of combinative imagination on my part :)
So I will keep on sticking to the horizon line :D
Anyway, in the case I mentioned, the Sun arrives to the Ascendant 27 minutes (of clock time) later.
I hope you do not mind my hairsplitting but I have at least 3 (natal) charts in the archives with the Sun very near to the Ascendant (not 12 degrees as above but 1-2) but still below it and trying to learn and apply traditional astrology I think it is actually important (considering not only the Sun but the other planets as well).

Cheers

Iris

10
Tom, I've gotten tech support calls because of the "bug" in the program that said the chart was diurnal when the Sun was about half a degree below the ascendant. What people don't realize is that the Sun's disk will appear above the horizon due to atmospheric refraction. Schmidt suggested that it should be that if any part of the Sun's disk is visible to an observer (with an ideal flat landscape such as the ocean for example) then the chart is diurnal, else nocturnal. However at sunset, the diurnal sect is a bit of a lame duck and near sunrise, the same for the nocturnal sect.

I would have been a lot easier to just program ascendant < Sun < descendant, but I was being too careful.
Curtis Manwaring
Zoidiasoft Technologies, LLC

11
Like I said I'm sure there are charts where this is a problem, but compared to how many charts I've looked at over the years, the percentage is very, very tiny.

12
irisalbus wrote: I hope you do not mind my hairsplitting but I have at least 3 (natal) charts in the archives with the Sun very near to the Ascendant (not 12 degrees as above but 1-2) but still below it and trying to learn and apply traditional astrology I think it is actually important (considering not only the Sun but the other planets as well).
Chris Brennan has a lecture for purchase that might be helpful in cases like these:

http://www.chrisbrennanastrologer.com/s ... t-lecture/

In this lecture he uses the sect malefics and benefics to help decide whether a chart is diurnal or nocturnal. You might want to get it and see if it helps

ea