Quote:
Originally Posted by Maksutov
I read what you wrote and it was far from a "refutation". Just the opposite. Phil's points stand, despite your imagining they don't. The signs are a "physical product"? "Ophiuchus is a distant collection of stars which happens to cross the ecliptic" and Scorpius is not? You've got to be putting us on. As with your other threads, the farther along you get, the more astrological (and therefore less scientific) your "arguments" become. To paraphrase Mark Twain, enjoy your own self-deceptions. But please don't waste your time, and more importantly, that of others, trying to foist them on the science of astronomy.
|
This is physics, not astrology. I explained the physics of the tropical signs at
this post. The signs are a physical product of the relation between the earth and the sun, and have nothing to do with the stars. Ophiuchus is entirely irrelevant to the actual claims at hand. The sign Scorpio is the region of the ecliptic from 210 to 240 degrees east of the vernal equinox. Due to precession this segment of the ecliptic is now in the constellation Libra. Your confusion arises from the invalid assumption that I am proposing or relying on some causal relation between this tropical definition of the sign and the observed constellation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by agingjb
I fear that the use of the word "house" tips my reaction to this theory from - "it's possible that these numbers do correspond to the dynamics of the Solar system, but I don't see how they have any relevance to events in human history" - to - "this looks far too much like astrology".
|
I totally understand where you are coming from. My use of the term ‘house’ is admittedly drawn from astrology, but I can’t see a better term to explain the observations. In referring to the Age of Pisces, I am simply talking about the period when the vernal equinox is in that constellation, rather than discussing speculative ideas.
I am now attaching graphs of the JSN conjunctions in years 53-4, 232, 411, 590 and 769 to explain my use of the term ‘house of the age’. These graphs show points separated by precisely 179 years, the period I call the house. They illustrate several interesting features of this cycle, and improve on the accuracy of the dates in my recently posted table.
- After each SSB 179 year cycle, Jupiter and Saturn form a conjunction at a position that is a precise multiple of 30 degrees from the vernal equinox, ie exactly on a sign cusp. This conjunction moves forward along the zodiac by exactly one sign per 179 years. In 54 the conjunction is precisely between Pisces and Aries, in 232 between Aries and Taurus, etc.
- The JS conjunction moves backward against the conjunctions with Neptune by 0.2 years per cycle, illustrating the 178.7/178.9 year ratio between these cycles.
- Neptune’s position also advances by one sign in each 179 year cycle (=1.086 orbits)
- This conjunction gradually moves out of alignment, so for example it is exact in 769 but by 1306 the gap is 1.2 years.
- A new ‘family of conjunctions’ (perhaps analogous to the Saros eclipse cycle?) can be seen moving into exact alignment in 1524 in Pisces, once again showing the highly unusual feature (from 1881) that the JS conjunction is exactly on the sign cusp.
I apologise that this material is off the mainstream for ordinary astronomers. That does not make it any less scientific, although admittedly it does lend itself to use for more speculative purposes.