Guest guest Posted December 1, 2005 Report Share Posted December 1, 2005 Dear Ash, Since I am not able to use the KAS today, can you tell me the value for 2000, I have to insert the value for this year in my program. So I will be able to talk with the same dates. Thank you again for all kind answer Regards Xavier -----Message d'origine-----De : De la part de AshEnvoyé : jeudi 1 décembre 2005 04:31À : Objet : Re: value of Krushna ayanamsa Dear Xavier, There was a discussion about this and you can look up the archives for the same. The KAS2005 program gives the proper ayanamsa. Please bear with us till we get around to revising the lesson to reflect the proper value. In the mean time for now use the KAS2005 program value it will give the most proper value of KAY. Thanks, Cheers !!! Ash Xavier <murerx wrote: Dear Ash, According to the lesson 6 about ayanamsa, the value for K Aya. is 21°26'44'' in 1900, but according to a member of Denis Laboure's forum, who has the luck to download correctly the KAS, the value for 1900 is different : 21° 33'23''. In order to adjust my program, can you tell me the ayanamsa for 01/01/2000. If it is true, we have the explanation of the difference of one month in the example below. It is a revision of the ayanamsa? Why? My difficulty to use the KAS programme is due of the difficulty of languages setting. The computers I used is in french and the other in chinese (I live in China). I think I have the beginning of the solution :-) Regards Xavier Dear Xavier, Ok. Thank you for giving me the dates. You said the the career of your friend started in March 1973. At that time it was not Ve antra running but Ketu antra. Ketu 1972-Mar-18 1973-Apr-05 Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free. Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 1, 2005 Report Share Posted December 1, 2005 Dear Xavier, The KAY value for 1st Jan 2000 is 22:57:11. Thanks, Cheers !!! Ash , " Xavier " <murerx> wrote: > > Dear Ash, > Since I am not able to use the KAS today, can you tell me the value for > 2000, I have to insert the value for this year in my program. So I will > be able to talk with the same dates. > Thank you again for all kind answer > Regards > Xavier > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : > De la part de Ash > Envoyé : jeudi 1 décembre 2005 04:31 > À : > Objet : Re: value of Krushna ayanamsa > > > Dear Xavier, > There was a discussion about this and you can look up the archives for > the same. > The KAS2005 program gives the proper ayanamsa. Please bear with us till > we get around to revising the lesson to reflect the proper value. In > the mean time for now use the KAS2005 program value it will give the > most proper value of KAY. > Thanks, > Cheers !!! > Ash > > > Xavier <murerx> wrote: > > Dear Ash, > > According to the lesson 6 about ayanamsa, the value for K Aya. is > 21°26'44'' in 1900, but according to a member of Denis Laboure's forum, > who has the luck to download correctly the KAS, the value for 1900 is > different : 21° 33'23''. In order to adjust my program, can you tell me > the ayanamsa for 01/01/2000. If it is true, we have the explanation of > the difference of one month in the example below. > It is a revision of the ayanamsa? Why? > My difficulty to use the KAS programme is due of the difficulty of > languages setting. The computers I used is in french and the other in > chinese (I live in China). I think I have the beginning of the solution > :-) > > Regards > Xavier > > Dear Xavier, > Ok. Thank you for giving me the dates. You said the the career of your > friend started in March 1973. At that time it was not Ve antra running > but Ketu antra. > > Ketu 1972-Mar-18 1973-Apr-05 > > > > > > _____ > > > <http://pa./*http://us.rd./evt=36035/*http://music. yah > oo.com/unlimited/> Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it > free. > > > > _____ > > > <http://pa./*http://us.rd./evt=36035/*http://music. yah > oo.com/unlimited/> Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it > free. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 2, 2005 Report Share Posted December 2, 2005 Dear Ash and list members, , " ashsam73 " <ashsam73> wrote: > The KAY value for 1st Jan 2000 is 22:57:11. As a very new member to the list, I would like to say that I am very proud to be a member of it. English is a second tongue, so it is harder to understand. Also given the fact that it is also my first steps in astrology, it gets even harder! I am glad that Marguerite Lettens translated the lessons of Krushna in French. Thank you Marguerite! The worksheet seems to be a little wonder: everything is there!... We are now talking about the ayanamsha on Denis Labouré's forum, and the question rose about why and how did Krushna updated the ayanamsha? Xavier will confirm, I hope, that he finds few events that work better for him with the updated ayanamsha. Also, a member of another French list in astrology, François Carrière, spoke of the " polar longitude " of Spica (Chitra) and created his own ayanamsha, one that has a 0° value for 19 january 347, 11h16m30s GMT, Spica having then a value of 180° in right ascension (equatorial coordinates), and correspondingly a value of 180°51' on the ecliptic (according to Swiss Ephemeris and Astrolog freewares), a value near the one found in the Sura Siddhanta, translated by Burgess. This new ayanamsha, according to him, is 3' away from Krushna... I wonder if Carrière is not overly self- conceited!!! Philippe Bonin is also suspicious about this " polar longitude " thing... May be he will explain us why, since I do not fully understand what he said on the french list. So, can anybody explain the reasons (and sources) for this update? -- Many thanks and regards, David Rhéaume Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 2, 2005 Report Share Posted December 2, 2005 Dear David Rheaume, The start date of the Krushnas Ayanamsa is not changed not has been updated its still the same as 24th Feb 366 AD. You might want to refer to the archives where such discussion have taken place and the reason for the difference. For those who know how to compute the value of ayanamsa the start date of Krushnas Ayanamsa = 24th FEBRUARY 366 AD. That hasent changed. Thanks, Cheers !!! Ash --- In , " david_rheaume_1963 " <david_rheaume_1963> wrote: > > Dear Ash and list members, > > , " ashsam73 " > <ashsam73> wrote: > > > The KAY value for 1st Jan 2000 is 22:57:11. > > As a very new member to the list, I would like to say that I am very > proud to be a member of it. English is a second tongue, so it is > harder to understand. Also given the fact that it is also my first > steps in astrology, it gets even harder! > > I am glad that Marguerite Lettens translated the lessons of Krushna > in French. Thank you Marguerite! > > The worksheet seems to be a little wonder: everything is there!... > > We are now talking about the ayanamsha on Denis Labouré's forum, and > the question rose about why and how did Krushna updated the > ayanamsha? Xavier will confirm, I hope, that he finds few events that > work better for him with the updated ayanamsha. > > Also, a member of another French list in astrology, François > Carrière, spoke of the " polar longitude " of Spica (Chitra) and > created his own ayanamsha, one that has a 0° value for 19 january > 347, 11h16m30s GMT, Spica having then a value of 180° in right > ascension (equatorial coordinates), and correspondingly a value of > 180°51' on the ecliptic (according to Swiss Ephemeris and Astrolog > freewares), a value near the one found in the Sura Siddhanta, > translated by Burgess. This new ayanamsha, according to him, is 3' > away from Krushna... I wonder if Carrière is not overly self- > conceited!!! > > Philippe Bonin is also suspicious about this " polar longitude " > thing... May be he will explain us why, since I do not fully > understand what he said on the french list. > > So, can anybody explain the reasons (and sources) for this update? > > -- > Many thanks and regards, > David Rhéaume > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 2, 2005 Report Share Posted December 2, 2005 ashsam73 <ashsam73 écrivit: > Dear David Rheaume, > > The start date of the Krushnas Ayanamsa is not changed not has been > updated its still the same as 24th Feb 366 AD. > > You might want to refer to the archives where such discussion have > taken place and the reason for the difference. > > For those who know how to compute the value of ayanamsa the start > date of Krushnas Ayanamsa = 24th FEBRUARY 366 AD. That hasent > changed. Dear Ash, Thank you for your kind answer. I will answer David on the French list, it will be easier. However, given the data I use (with precession rate used by Swiss Ephemeris and Astrolog freeware), a date of november 6, 350, seems to work better with the other software I use. David told in me a private email that Philippe Bonin defined a polar longitude as the degree of ecliptic that is culminating at the same time of the star (Spica in our case). Using this definition, november 6, 350, match with a tropical midheaven of 0°0°44 " Libra. Then with the modern rate of precession, from this date, we get 22°57'11 " for year 2000. However, using the updated spreadsheet, I do not understand how we can take 24th feb 366, since it uses Swiss Ephemeris dll... how then is calculated the precession? -- With my best regards, François Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 2, 2005 Report Share Posted December 2, 2005 Hello Ash, First thanks to all those who have produced the new Excel worksheet, which is great. The results also seem to me to give slightly more accurate timings than the previous one (thanks to the small change in the ayanamsha). But if the start date of the old list was 24 Feb 366, I don't see how it can be the same once the ayanamsha has been changed - unless the rate of precession used has also been changed, which it doesn't seem to be (it still seems to be an average of 50.33 " per year). The worksheet doesn't accept a date of 366, so we can't see if it would calculate 0° for that date. But if we set other reputable astrology programs to use the new Krushna ayanamasha (ie. to give the same ayanamsha on the same dates as the worksheet, such as 21.33.23 on 1st Jan 1900), and then work back with those other programs until we get to a " start " date when ayanamsha is zero, then we get a " year zero " between November 350 and February 351, depending on the program (probably they each have slightly different ways of calculating the rate of precession). But no program gives a year zero, with the new Krushna ayanamsha, any later than February 351. The programs used are Parashara's Light, Jaganattha Hora, Solar Fire and Astrolog. So what I would like to know is, does the new KAS ayanamsha (which seems to me to work well) use a new or different way of calculating the rate of precession, so as to keep the same start date of 366 as the old Krushna ayanamsha? Thanks for any clarification! Graham , " ashsam73 " <ashsam73> wrote: > > Dear David Rheaume, > > The start date of the Krushnas Ayanamsa is not changed not has been > updated its still the same as 24th Feb 366 AD. > > You might want to refer to the archives where such discussion have > taken place and the reason for the difference. > > For those who know how to compute the value of ayanamsa the start > date of Krushnas Ayanamsa = 24th FEBRUARY 366 AD. That hasent > changed. > > Thanks, > Cheers !!! > Ash > > > > > --- In > , " david_rheaume_1963 " > <david_rheaume_1963> wrote: > > > > Dear Ash and list members, > > > > , " ashsam73 " > > <ashsam73> wrote: > > > > > The KAY value for 1st Jan 2000 is 22:57:11. > > > > As a very new member to the list, I would like to say that I am > very > > proud to be a member of it. English is a second tongue, so it is > > harder to understand. Also given the fact that it is also my first > > steps in astrology, it gets even harder! > > > > I am glad that Marguerite Lettens translated the lessons of > Krushna > > in French. Thank you Marguerite! > > > > The worksheet seems to be a little wonder: everything is there!... > > > > We are now talking about the ayanamsha on Denis Labouré's forum, > and > > the question rose about why and how did Krushna updated the > > ayanamsha? Xavier will confirm, I hope, that he finds few events > that > > work better for him with the updated ayanamsha. > > > > Also, a member of another French list in astrology, François > > Carrière, spoke of the " polar longitude " of Spica (Chitra) and > > created his own ayanamsha, one that has a 0° value for 19 january > > 347, 11h16m30s GMT, Spica having then a value of 180° in right > > ascension (equatorial coordinates), and correspondingly a value of > > 180°51' on the ecliptic (according to Swiss Ephemeris and Astrolog > > freewares), a value near the one found in the Sura Siddhanta, > > translated by Burgess. This new ayanamsha, according to him, is 3' > > away from Krushna... I wonder if Carrière is not overly self- > > conceited!!! > > > > Philippe Bonin is also suspicious about this " polar longitude " > > thing... May be he will explain us why, since I do not fully > > understand what he said on the french list. > > > > So, can anybody explain the reasons (and sources) for this update? > > > > -- > > Many thanks and regards, > > David Rhéaume > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 2, 2005 Report Share Posted December 2, 2005 Dear Graham and François, I am not aware of the engines that software programs use for calculations but ayanamsa. Now the value for 1/1/1900 is 21:33:23 and the starting date when the split took place is 24th Feb 366 AD. These 2 things are constant. Now you can keep these 2 as the parameters as constant and as known parameters and then can find out all the other unknowns such based on these values. I think that will clear these things. But I want to again repeate that the date of the split was never changed it was and is 24th Feb 366 AD. The reason for the differnce that crept in I have written about it in detail and its in the archives. You can read up on " why " there was a difference crept in erronously. Krushnas ayanamsa gives us the accurate position of planets which I see so many people giving feedback that the vimshottari dasha explain their charts in much better fashion and you yourselves might have observed. The whole system of KAS is based on KAY. Now if you all are using a software and then working backwords on the strength of the program and reachign 350 or 351 I cant say anything. Only thing then left is to do manual calculations and work backwards keeping 2 things constant i.e. the ayanamsa value on 1/1/1900 = 21:33:23 and the staring date of the split or 0 ayanamsa is 24th Feb 366 AD. I hope this helps, Cheers !!! Ash , " Graham Fox " <fox.graham@w...> wrote: > > Hello Ash, > First thanks to all those who have produced the new Excel worksheet, > which is great. The results also seem to me to give slightly more > accurate timings than the previous one (thanks to the small change > in the ayanamsha). > But if the start date of the old list was 24 Feb 366, I don't see > how it can be the same once the ayanamsha has been changed - unless > the rate of precession used has also been changed, which it doesn't > seem to be (it still seems to be an average of 50.33 " per year). > The worksheet doesn't accept a date of 366, so we can't see if it > would calculate 0° for that date. But if we set other reputable > astrology programs to use the new Krushna ayanamasha (ie. to give > the same ayanamsha on the same dates as the worksheet, such as > 21.33.23 on 1st Jan 1900), and then work back with those other > programs until we get to a " start " date when ayanamsha is zero, then > we get a " year zero " between November 350 and February 351, > depending on the program (probably they each have slightly different > ways of calculating the rate of precession). But no program gives a > year zero, with the new Krushna ayanamsha, any later than February > 351. The programs used are Parashara's Light, Jaganattha Hora, Solar > Fire and Astrolog. So what I would like to know is, does the new KAS > ayanamsha (which seems to me to work well) use a new or different > way of calculating the rate of precession, so as to keep the same > start date of 366 as the old Krushna ayanamsha? > Thanks for any clarification! > Graham > > , " ashsam73 " > <ashsam73> wrote: > > > > Dear David Rheaume, > > > > The start date of the Krushnas Ayanamsa is not changed not has > been > > updated its still the same as 24th Feb 366 AD. > > > > You might want to refer to the archives where such discussion have > > taken place and the reason for the difference. > > > > For those who know how to compute the value of ayanamsa the start > > date of Krushnas Ayanamsa = 24th FEBRUARY 366 AD. That hasent > > changed. > > > > Thanks, > > Cheers !!! > > Ash > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > , " david_rheaume_1963 " > > <david_rheaume_1963> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Ash and list members, > > > > > > , " ashsam73 " > > > <ashsam73> wrote: > > > > > > > The KAY value for 1st Jan 2000 is 22:57:11. > > > > > > As a very new member to the list, I would like to say that I am > > very > > > proud to be a member of it. English is a second tongue, so it is > > > harder to understand. Also given the fact that it is also my > first > > > steps in astrology, it gets even harder! > > > > > > I am glad that Marguerite Lettens translated the lessons of > > Krushna > > > in French. Thank you Marguerite! > > > > > > The worksheet seems to be a little wonder: everything is > there!... > > > > > > We are now talking about the ayanamsha on Denis Labouré's forum, > > and > > > the question rose about why and how did Krushna updated the > > > ayanamsha? Xavier will confirm, I hope, that he finds few events > > that > > > work better for him with the updated ayanamsha. > > > > > > Also, a member of another French list in astrology, François > > > Carrière, spoke of the " polar longitude " of Spica (Chitra) and > > > created his own ayanamsha, one that has a 0° value for 19 > january > > > 347, 11h16m30s GMT, Spica having then a value of 180° in right > > > ascension (equatorial coordinates), and correspondingly a value > of > > > 180°51' on the ecliptic (according to Swiss Ephemeris and > Astrolog > > > freewares), a value near the one found in the Sura Siddhanta, > > > translated by Burgess. This new ayanamsha, according to him, is > 3' > > > away from Krushna... I wonder if Carrière is not overly self- > > > conceited!!! > > > > > > Philippe Bonin is also suspicious about this " polar longitude " > > > thing... May be he will explain us why, since I do not fully > > > understand what he said on the french list. > > > > > > So, can anybody explain the reasons (and sources) for this > update? > > > > > > -- > > > Many thanks and regards, > > > David Rhéaume > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 3, 2005 Report Share Posted December 3, 2005 Dear Ash, Thanks for your quick reply. I guess we just have to take it on trust, as I have hunted through the archives but can't find anything that really explains how this starting date can give the new KAY. As you say, people do definitely find that the KAS works better than other systems, and the KAS is based on the KAY. But this was true before the change as well, everybody seemed happy with the system and the ayanamsa! It's a pity the worksheet doesn't go back to 366 AD, then we would clearly be able to see the starting date and not just take it as " gospel " ! But personally I find the new Krushna ayanamsa slightly more accurate than the old, so I'm very happy to use it and no more questions about the starting date! Thanks Graham , " ashsam73 " <ashsam73> wrote: > > Dear Graham and François, > I am not aware of the engines that software programs use for > calculations but ayanamsa. > > Now the value for 1/1/1900 is 21:33:23 and the starting date when > the split took place is 24th Feb 366 AD. These 2 things are > constant. > > Now you can keep these 2 as the parameters as constant and as known > parameters and then can find out all the other unknowns such based > on these values. > > I think that will clear these things. But I want to again repeate > that the date of the split was never changed it was and is 24th Feb > 366 AD. > > The reason for the differnce that crept in I have written about it > in detail and its in the archives. You can read up on " why " there > was a difference crept in erronously. > > Krushnas ayanamsa gives us the accurate position of planets which I > see so many people giving feedback that the vimshottari dasha > explain their charts in much better fashion and you yourselves might > have observed. The whole system of KAS is based on KAY. > > Now if you all are using a software and then working backwords on > the strength of the program and reachign 350 or 351 I cant say > anything. > > Only thing then left is to do manual calculations and work backwards > keeping 2 things constant i.e. the ayanamsa value on 1/1/1900 = > 21:33:23 and the staring date of the split or 0 ayanamsa is 24th Feb > 366 AD. > > I hope this helps, > Cheers !!! > Ash > > > , " Graham Fox " > <fox.graham@w...> wrote: > > > > Hello Ash, > > First thanks to all those who have produced the new Excel > worksheet, > > which is great. The results also seem to me to give slightly more > > accurate timings than the previous one (thanks to the small change > > in the ayanamsha). > > But if the start date of the old list was 24 Feb 366, I don't see > > how it can be the same once the ayanamsha has been changed - > unless > > the rate of precession used has also been changed, which it > doesn't > > seem to be (it still seems to be an average of 50.33 " per year). > > The worksheet doesn't accept a date of 366, so we can't see if it > > would calculate 0° for that date. But if we set other reputable > > astrology programs to use the new Krushna ayanamasha (ie. to give > > the same ayanamsha on the same dates as the worksheet, such as > > 21.33.23 on 1st Jan 1900), and then work back with those other > > programs until we get to a " start " date when ayanamsha is zero, > then > > we get a " year zero " between November 350 and February 351, > > depending on the program (probably they each have slightly > different > > ways of calculating the rate of precession). But no program gives > a > > year zero, with the new Krushna ayanamsha, any later than February > > 351. The programs used are Parashara's Light, Jaganattha Hora, > Solar > > Fire and Astrolog. So what I would like to know is, does the new > KAS > > ayanamsha (which seems to me to work well) use a new or different > > way of calculating the rate of precession, so as to keep the same > > start date of 366 as the old Krushna ayanamsha? > > Thanks for any clarification! > > Graham > > > > , " ashsam73 " > > <ashsam73> wrote: > > > > > > Dear David Rheaume, > > > > > > The start date of the Krushnas Ayanamsa is not changed not has > > been > > > updated its still the same as 24th Feb 366 AD. > > > > > > You might want to refer to the archives where such discussion > have > > > taken place and the reason for the difference. > > > > > > For those who know how to compute the value of ayanamsa the > start > > > date of Krushnas Ayanamsa = 24th FEBRUARY 366 AD. That hasent > > > changed. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Cheers !!! > > > Ash > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > , " david_rheaume_1963 " > > > <david_rheaume_1963> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Ash and list members, > > > > > > > > , " ashsam73 " > > > > <ashsam73> wrote: > > > > > > > > > The KAY value for 1st Jan 2000 is 22:57:11. > > > > > > > > As a very new member to the list, I would like to say that I > am > > > very > > > > proud to be a member of it. English is a second tongue, so it > is > > > > harder to understand. Also given the fact that it is also my > > first > > > > steps in astrology, it gets even harder! > > > > > > > > I am glad that Marguerite Lettens translated the lessons of > > > Krushna > > > > in French. Thank you Marguerite! > > > > > > > > The worksheet seems to be a little wonder: everything is > > there!... > > > > > > > > We are now talking about the ayanamsha on Denis Labouré's > forum, > > > and > > > > the question rose about why and how did Krushna updated the > > > > ayanamsha? Xavier will confirm, I hope, that he finds few > events > > > that > > > > work better for him with the updated ayanamsha. > > > > > > > > Also, a member of another French list in astrology, François > > > > Carrière, spoke of the " polar longitude " of Spica (Chitra) and > > > > created his own ayanamsha, one that has a 0° value for 19 > > january > > > > 347, 11h16m30s GMT, Spica having then a value of 180° in right > > > > ascension (equatorial coordinates), and correspondingly a > value > > of > > > > 180°51' on the ecliptic (according to Swiss Ephemeris and > > Astrolog > > > > freewares), a value near the one found in the Sura Siddhanta, > > > > translated by Burgess. This new ayanamsha, according to him, > is > > 3' > > > > away from Krushna... I wonder if Carrière is not overly self- > > > > conceited!!! > > > > > > > > Philippe Bonin is also suspicious about this " polar longitude " > > > > thing... May be he will explain us why, since I do not fully > > > > understand what he said on the french list. > > > > > > > > So, can anybody explain the reasons (and sources) for this > > update? > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Many thanks and regards, > > > > David Rhéaume > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 3, 2005 Report Share Posted December 3, 2005 Dear François and Ash, I've checked the rate of precession used by the new KAS spreadsheet for the period that it will calculate. It seems to be using a variable, and in fact slightly accelerating precession rate. For example, between 1900 and 1930, the rate averages at 50.26 " . But between 1900 and 2099, the rate averages at 50.29 " per year However, in order to have a starting date of 2nd February 366 (Gregorian calendar), and to arrive at 21°33'23 " in 1900, it would need a much faster overall average precession rate of 50.58 " per year. This seems unlikely: not only is it much greater than the rate proposed by modern astronomers, but also greater than the maximum rate proposed by traditional Vedic astrologers (54 " per year). It would be nice to have confirmation from Krushna of the correct start date, and/or from the creators of the spreadsheet as to how they calculate precession rate. In the meantime, I'm quite happy to use the new spreadsheet and to set aside the question of the starting date. Best wishes Graham , " FRANCOIS CARRIERE " <shaula001@g...> wrote: > > ashsam73 <ashsam73> écrivit: > > > Dear David Rheaume, > > > > The start date of the Krushnas Ayanamsa is not changed not has been > > updated its still the same as 24th Feb 366 AD. > > > > You might want to refer to the archives where such discussion have > > taken place and the reason for the difference. > > > > For those who know how to compute the value of ayanamsa the start > > date of Krushnas Ayanamsa = 24th FEBRUARY 366 AD. That hasent > > changed. > > Dear Ash, > > Thank you for your kind answer. I will answer David on the French list, it > will be easier. However, given the data I use (with precession rate used by > Swiss Ephemeris and Astrolog freeware), a date of november 6, 350, seems to > work better with the other software I use. David told in me a private email > that Philippe Bonin defined a polar longitude as the degree of ecliptic that > is culminating at the same time of the star (Spica in our case). Using this > definition, november 6, 350, match with a tropical midheaven of > 0°0°44 " Libra. Then with the modern rate of precession, from this date, we > get 22°57'11 " for year 2000. > > However, using the updated spreadsheet, I do not understand how we can take > 24th feb 366, since it uses Swiss Ephemeris dll... how then is calculated > the precession? > > -- > With my best regards, > François > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 3, 2005 Report Share Posted December 3, 2005 Dear François and Ash, Sorry! With my usual dexterity with figures, I got in a muddle. The overall average precession rate of 50.58 " per year implied by the new spreadsheet (the average rate from 366 to 1966, to be precise)is only somewhat greater than the rate proposed by modern astronomers (about 50.33 " per year), but is of course LESS (not more, as I said) than the maximum rate proposed by traditional Vedic astrologers (54 " per year). So the start date of 366 does not seem in any way preposterous. Please excuse me. It does seem, though, that the rate varies over time, and it would be interesting and helpful to have any information on this. Best wishes Graham , " Graham Fox " <fox.graham@w...> wrote: > > Dear François and Ash, > I've checked the rate of precession used by the new KAS spreadsheet > for the period that it will calculate. It seems to be using a > variable, and in fact slightly accelerating precession rate. For > example, between 1900 and 1930, the rate averages at 50.26 " . But > between 1900 and 2099, the rate averages at 50.29 " per year > However, in order to have a starting date of 2nd February 366 > (Gregorian calendar), and to arrive at 21°33'23 " in 1900, it would > need a much faster overall average precession rate of 50.58 " per > year. This seems unlikely: not only is it much greater than the rate > proposed by modern astronomers, but also greater than the maximum > rate proposed by traditional Vedic astrologers (54 " per year). > It would be nice to have confirmation from Krushna of the correct > start date, and/or from the creators of the spreadsheet as to how > they calculate precession rate. In the meantime, I'm quite happy to > use the new spreadsheet and to set aside the question of the > starting date. > Best wishes > Graham > > > , " FRANCOIS CARRIERE " > <shaula001@g...> wrote: > > > > ashsam73 <ashsam73> écrivit: > > > > > Dear David Rheaume, > > > > > > The start date of the Krushnas Ayanamsa is not changed not has > been > > > updated its still the same as 24th Feb 366 AD. > > > > > > You might want to refer to the archives where such discussion > have > > > taken place and the reason for the difference. > > > > > > For those who know how to compute the value of ayanamsa the start > > > date of Krushnas Ayanamsa = 24th FEBRUARY 366 AD. That hasent > > > changed. > > > > Dear Ash, > > > > Thank you for your kind answer. I will answer David on the French > list, it > > will be easier. However, given the data I use (with precession > rate used by > > Swiss Ephemeris and Astrolog freeware), a date of november 6, 350, > seems to > > work better with the other software I use. David told in me a > private email > > that Philippe Bonin defined a polar longitude as the degree of > ecliptic that > > is culminating at the same time of the star (Spica in our case). > Using this > > definition, november 6, 350, match with a tropical midheaven of > > 0°0°44 " Libra. Then with the modern rate of precession, from this > date, we > > get 22°57'11 " for year 2000. > > > > However, using the updated spreadsheet, I do not understand how we > can take > > 24th feb 366, since it uses Swiss Ephemeris dll... how then is > calculated > > the precession? > > > > -- > > With my best regards, > > François > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.