Hi all,
Something I just noticed and thought it might need more focus.
I follow the progressed standalone chart (let's call it PS) and have found it to be very useful.
I just did it for James Woods (18 May 1947 (11.30am Vernal, Utah) and saw something that seems to throw everything out.
If you add his current age (77 and 9 months) to his birth date, you get early hours of 5 July 1947), you will note, approximately:
PS Mars 2Gem45 conjunct PS Node 0Gem20.
PS Venus 25Gem42 conjunct PS Uranus 23Gem09.
You can see that these positions show a major event about 18-24 months ago, when the Mars was conjunct the Node and the Venus was directly conjunct Uranus.
Either he had a major event then (which he did not, apparently), or these conjunctions are indicating the massive event he's just gone through, along with thousands of others, Mars (fire) and a violent Venus disruption, the fires around LA.
So my quandary now is that I've been looking at the progressed standalone chart incorrectly, perhaps it responds to the length of the solar day, as do primary directions?
Can anyone help? I am confused because I watch my PS planets hitting the angles and there are events, very pertinent, e.g. Mars on my MC, dived off a surfboard after riding a wave and compacted/nearly broke my neck on a shallow sandbank.
According to Astro d0t com, "Uniform movement of all points or use of a time equivalence that includes actual planetary motion. Traditionally, all points are moved uniformly with their directed positions being calculated on the basis of advancement of the RAMC, but ignoring any proper motion due to the passage of time. This uniform motion is the common understanding of the word "direction". Another view is to consider the direction to be a mapping of an earlier time in the native's life to a transit time. In this approach, sometimes called "primary progressions", the proper motion of the planets between the radix and directed times is taken into account by erecting a normal chart for the directed time and comparing its mundane positions to those of the radix."
Something I just noticed and thought it might need more focus.
I follow the progressed standalone chart (let's call it PS) and have found it to be very useful.
I just did it for James Woods (18 May 1947 (11.30am Vernal, Utah) and saw something that seems to throw everything out.
If you add his current age (77 and 9 months) to his birth date, you get early hours of 5 July 1947), you will note, approximately:
PS Mars 2Gem45 conjunct PS Node 0Gem20.
PS Venus 25Gem42 conjunct PS Uranus 23Gem09.
You can see that these positions show a major event about 18-24 months ago, when the Mars was conjunct the Node and the Venus was directly conjunct Uranus.
Either he had a major event then (which he did not, apparently), or these conjunctions are indicating the massive event he's just gone through, along with thousands of others, Mars (fire) and a violent Venus disruption, the fires around LA.
So my quandary now is that I've been looking at the progressed standalone chart incorrectly, perhaps it responds to the length of the solar day, as do primary directions?
Can anyone help? I am confused because I watch my PS planets hitting the angles and there are events, very pertinent, e.g. Mars on my MC, dived off a surfboard after riding a wave and compacted/nearly broke my neck on a shallow sandbank.
According to Astro d0t com, "Uniform movement of all points or use of a time equivalence that includes actual planetary motion. Traditionally, all points are moved uniformly with their directed positions being calculated on the basis of advancement of the RAMC, but ignoring any proper motion due to the passage of time. This uniform motion is the common understanding of the word "direction". Another view is to consider the direction to be a mapping of an earlier time in the native's life to a transit time. In this approach, sometimes called "primary progressions", the proper motion of the planets between the radix and directed times is taken into account by erecting a normal chart for the directed time and comparing its mundane positions to those of the radix."