Re: Right Ascension,Declinations,Parans
- I found my answer to my question about Brady's view about Right Ascension
"The ecliptic is the circle of the zodiac, and is shown in every chart as the outer zodiac ring, on to which the planets are placed. This works well as a method of representing the position of planets within the two dimensional limitation of a horoscope, because the Sun is always exactly on the ecliptic, and the planets are always close to the ecliptic.
The stars, however, are not close to the ecliptic; they cover the celestial sphere from pole to pole. Nonetheless, the technique of star- aspecting chooses to sacrifice the stars' true position in the sky by projecting all stars to the ecliptic.
For example, Arcturus, which is located in the figure on the line of the horizon (near the number "60"), would be projected along the lines of Right Ascension (blue lines) until it cut the ecliptic. This projected position would be close to the Sun in early degrees of Scorpio. Thus an astrologer who worked with star aspects would say that Arcturus is at 3° or 4° Scorpio, and therefore conjunct the Sun.
This is done to enable the star to be represented in the two-dimensional framework of a horoscope, in a similar manner to the planets. Unfortunately this technique sacrifices information about the true position of stars on the celestial sphere, and has consequently resulted in some misconceptions among astrologers."
She is referring to the Right Ascension coordinates of Arcturus in ecliptic longitude equivalent. I have Sun in alignment with Arcturus in Right Ascension. They conjunct between 3 to 4 degrees Scorpio when using Zodiac Longitude equivalent.
both local midnight - modern day setting and previous midnight - Hebrew,Babylonian day shows Arcturus culminated as Sun culminated
so even though Sun and Arcturus are in alignment in Right Ascension, they actually have a visual connection if using the aforementioned day settings.
another thing to is that my Moon is in alignment with Fomalhaut in projected ecliptic longitude with 17 minutes of arc.
according to local midnight - modern day,Fomalhaut culminated as Moon culminated. Therefore,they could actually have a visual connection
This is what I read about the modern day that starts at midnight. It's known as the civil day.
"For civil purposes a common clock time has been defined for an entire region based on the mean local solar time at some central meridian. Such time zones began to be adopted about the middle of the 19th century when railroads with regular schedules came into use, with most major countries having adopted them by 1929. For the whole world, 40 such time zones are now in use. The main one is "world time" or Coordinated Universal Time (UTC).
The present common convention has the civil day starting at midnight, which is near the time of the lower culmination of the mean Sun on the central meridian of the time zone. A day is commonly divided into 24 hours of 60 minutes of 60 seconds each."
My Moon is in alignment with Sadalmelik with 13 minutes of arc in projected ecliptic longitude, and they are in paran in the Roman/Egyptian day setting and Babylonian/Hebrew setting but not in the modern day nor the astronomical day systems
stars being projected onto the ecliptic might be felt because there are corresponding parans with them...depending on which day system you look at.
My Moon is in alignment with Ancha with 18 minutes of arc , but it's a true conjunction in the actual sky too. They conjunct with 49 minutes of arc. So my Moon is actually in the hip of Aquarius constellation with it being in a true conjunction to Ancha.
My Sun parallels Khambalia in declinations with 4 minutes of arc,and their true separation is 1'19. I would say that parallel is relevant with it with the Sun being near Khambalia even though it's 19 minutes over 1 degree orb that's used with stars.
--- In email@example.com, "astynaz" <astynaz@...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > She uses the Egyptian/Roman day
> > > > previous sunrise
> > > >
> > > > what about Babylonian/Hebrew
> > > > previous sunset
> > > >
> > > > what about Astronomical
> > > > local moon
> > noon?
> yes....noon......sorry for the typo
> > > >
> > > > what about Modern Day
> I also wonder why Bernadette Brady includes only 64 stars to use.
> I noticed that when I added all the stars, there were a lot of parans that seemed too much to manage