The use of the RA Moon in progressing the SLR

[Guest guest]

Refr:02011602

Send:D:\Email\bin\02011607.jan

Wednesday, January 16, 2002

 

Bob:

I read with interest your experimentation with the Lunar

Return and with the Cardinal Lunar Ingress. However, I do think it is

incorrect to peg the return to the Lunar RA as well as to progress

the return on the Lunar RA, The rotation of the angles of any chart,

natal Solar or Lunar is an expression of Local Hour Angle of the

Sun. (LHAS) This is a constant relationship that is maintained. In

order to maintain this relationship, and progress the angles, the

Right Ascension of the Apparent Sun is increased over time. Fagan

and Allen used RA as a primary measurement. The understanding

of the relationship between the several coordinate systems is what

separates the men from the boys in Sidereal Astrology.

the relations can be seen in the following two calculations:

 

RAMC Return

- RAAS Return

------------

LHAS Constant for return

 

 

RAAS Tx Sun

+ LHAS Return

------------

RAMC prog Return

 

 

As for pegging the SLR to the RA of the Moon, that is

incorrect. . The technique does not produced timed results.The SQ

progressions did produce the proper planets on the proper angles,

both in the SSR and the SLR.Just as the moon will not necessarily

have the same RA when it returns to the natal place, so too, it will

not necessarily have the same longitude when it returns to the

same RA. Thus it will not be pegged to the to the same place in

the sky at each cycle. This is the whole point of a SIDEREAL

Return.

 

 

 

You are right about using the speculum to get exact dates. I

have published Casper Galespie's paper called A Short Course in

the SQ Progression in the January issue of Constellations. He

covers the progression and the use of the speculum in that paper.

To , send email to bfannin. and put

in the subject. You will be put in the data base and will

be sent the URL for the current issue each month.

 

Sidereally yours,

Bert Fannin

Editor Constellations

The On-line Astrological Magizine

http://www.ltastrology.com

Click on Constellations link

[Guest guest]

, bwfannin@e... wrote:

> Refr:02011602

> Send:D:\Email\bin\02011607.jan

> Wednesday, January 16, 2002

>

> Bob:

> I read with interest your experimentation with the Lunar

> Return and with the Cardinal Lunar Ingress.

 

My work with these charts ceased being experimentation years ago Bert.

 

However, I do think it is

> incorrect to peg the return to the Lunar RA as well as to progress

> the return on the Lunar RA,

 

It was exactly this kind of belief from most astrologers that Fagan

faced when he did his work and re-discovered the Sidereal returns.

Minds closed to the idea that there could possibly be another way of

doing things. I am glad that he did not let that stop him.

 

The rotation of the angles of any chart,

> natal Solar or Lunar is an expression of Local Hour Angle of the

> Sun. (LHAS) This is a constant relationship that is maintained. In

> order to maintain this relationship, and progress the angles, the

> Right Ascension of the Apparent Sun is increased over time. Fagan

> and Allen used RA as a primary measurement. The understanding

> of the relationship between the several coordinate systems is what

> separates the men from the boys in Sidereal Astrology.

 

And this is the kind of argument used by scientists to disavow

astrology. " Things just do not work that way! " Again the mind closed

to the idea that things might be done another way and a refusal to

match the " grunt work " of research (hundreds, perhaps thousands of

charts through the years), but instead dismiss, out of hand, what is

being presented.

 

> the relations can be seen in the following two calculations:

>

> RAMC Return

> - RAAS Return

> ------------

> LHAS Constant for return

>

>

> RAAS Tx Sun

> + LHAS Return

> ------------

> RAMC prog Return

>

>

> As for pegging the SLR to the RA of the Moon, that is

> incorrect. . The technique does not produced timed results.

 

How many charts did you research to come to authorize those

statements? Or is that more out of hand dismisal? Please look at the

chart produced by my progression, then come back and tell me the

technique does not produce timed results. It is posted in the Files

section.

 

 

The SQ

> progressions did produce the proper planets on the proper angles,

> both in the SSR and the SLR.

 

I have just finished doing the progression of the Caplunar following

your instructions. Have you done it? In what way does this progressed

chart produce the correct angles for this event? Perhaps you could

post the progressed Caplunar in the files section. I may have done it

wrong.

 

Just as the moon will not necessarily

> have the same RA when it returns to the natal place, so too, it

will

> not necessarily have the same longitude when it returns to the

> same RA. Thus it will not be pegged to the to the same place in

> the sky at each cycle. This is the whole point of a SIDEREAL

> Return.

>

>

You know these differences are small and will not produce any great

difference in the angles. Are we splitting hairs here?

>

> You are right about using the speculum to get exact dates.

I

> have published Casper Galespie's paper called A Short Course in

> the SQ Progression in the January issue of Constellations. He

> covers the progression and the use of the speculum in that paper.

 

I have been doing progressions of the solar and lunar returns and

using speculums for more than 25 years. I also do precessed natal

speculums.

 

> To , send email to bfannin@l... and put

> in the subject. You will be put in the data base and will

> be sent the URL for the current issue each month.

>

 

I believe I d last week or the week before Bert. I have many

of your articles in the 29 year collection of American Astrology that

I have, along with all of the articles by other Siderealists printed

in that magazine, and books by Fagan, Bradley, and Stahl.

 

> Sidereally yours,

> Bert Fannin

> Editor Constellations

> The On-line Astrological Magizine

> http://www.ltastrology.com

> Click on Constellations link

 

Thank you,

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

, " jan61108 " <jan61108> wrote:

> , bwfannin@e... wrote:

> > Refr:02011602

> > Send:D:\Email\bin\02011607.jan

> > Wednesday, January 16, 2002

> >

> > Bob:

> > I read with interest your experimentation with the Lunar

> > Return and with the Cardinal Lunar Ingress.

>

> My work with these charts ceased being experimentation years ago

Bert.

>

> However, I do think it is

> > incorrect to peg the return to the Lunar RA as well as to

progress

> > the return on the Lunar RA,

>

> It was exactly this kind of belief from most astrologers that Fagan

> faced when he did his work and re-discovered the Sidereal returns.

> Minds closed to the idea that there could possibly be another way

of

> doing things. I am glad that he did not let that stop him.

>

> The rotation of the angles of any chart,

> > natal Solar or Lunar is an expression of Local Hour Angle of the

> > Sun. (LHAS) This is a constant relationship that is maintained.

In

> > order to maintain this relationship, and progress the angles, the

> > Right Ascension of the Apparent Sun is increased over time. Fagan

> > and Allen used RA as a primary measurement. The understanding

> > of the relationship between the several coordinate systems is

what

> > separates the men from the boys in Sidereal Astrology.

>

> And this is the kind of argument used by scientists to disavow

> astrology. " Things just do not work that way! " Again the mind

closed

> to the idea that things might be done another way and a refusal to

> match the " grunt work " of research (hundreds, perhaps thousands of

> charts through the years), but instead dismiss, out of hand, what

is

> being presented.

>

> > the relations can be seen in the following two calculations:

> >

> > RAMC Return

> > - RAAS Return

> > ------------

> > LHAS Constant for return

> >

> >

> > RAAS Tx Sun

> > + LHAS Return

> > ------------

> > RAMC prog Return

> >

> >

> > As for pegging the SLR to the RA of the Moon, that is

> > incorrect. . The technique does not produced timed results.

>

> How many charts did you research to come to authorize those

> statements? Or is that more out of hand dismisal? Please look at

the

> chart produced by my progression, then come back and tell me the

> technique does not produce timed results. It is posted in the Files

> section.

>

>

> The SQ

> > progressions did produce the proper planets on the proper angles,

> > both in the SSR and the SLR.

>

> I have just finished doing the progression of the Caplunar

following

> your instructions. Have you done it? In what way does this

progressed

> chart produce the correct angles for this event? Perhaps you could

> post the progressed Caplunar in the files section. I may have done

it

> wrong.

>

> Just as the moon will not necessarily

> > have the same RA when it returns to the natal place, so too, it

> will

> > not necessarily have the same longitude when it returns to the

> > same RA. Thus it will not be pegged to the to the same place in

> > the sky at each cycle. This is the whole point of a SIDEREAL

> > Return.

> >

> >

> You know these differences are small and will not produce any great

> difference in the angles. Are we splitting hairs here?

> >

> > You are right about using the speculum to get exact

dates.

> I

> > have published Casper Galespie's paper called A Short Course in

> > the SQ Progression in the January issue of Constellations. He

> > covers the progression and the use of the speculum in that paper.

>

> I have been doing progressions of the solar and lunar returns and

> using speculums for more than 25 years. I also do precessed natal

> speculums.

>

> >...

> >

>

> ... I have many of your articles in the 29 year collection of

> American Astrology that I have, along with all of the articles by

> other Siderealists printed in that magazine, and books by Fagan,

> Bradley, and Stahl.

>

>

> Thank you,

>

> Bob

 

What kind of a group is this? You are presented with what is probably

the most correct chart representing the attack on the World Trade

Center any of you have ever seen and the one response is negative,

attempting to tell me how the way in which I do things is wrong. When

I respond to that I recieve an e-mail saying that that the sender

will respond to my responding post.

 

Well it has been 3 weeks and no such response. It does not take much

of ones time to respond to one post. We all fritter away more time

than it takes to make such a response. It seems like all that was

wanted was " How do you do it? " , and I freely gave the information.

 

The impression I get is of a group of takers, followers, and nay-

sayers, not people who want to pick ip the torch and carry it

forward. Friendly only to those considered " in " . In hopeing for more

acceptance I guess I expected too much. It is not my loss. Take if

you must, use the technique, but when someone asks you why you did

not use it before, be honest enough to tell them why not and why you

do now.

 

Bob