From: lmpm@teal.csn.org (L. M. P. McPherson)
Subject: Re: 1992 QB1, Beyond Pluto
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 01:31:35 GMT


In article <29SEP199221161662@vxcrna.cern.ch> casper@vxcrna.cern.ch (CASPER,DAVI./PPE) writes:
>In article <1992Sep29.101052.1@cubldr.colorado.edu>, crago_l@cubldr.colorado.edu writes...
>>The Object Beyond Pluto file just posted will be of interest to
>>astrologers. I found it in, of all places, alt.alien.visitors, and
>>have been trying for a couple of days to forward it to alt.astrology,
>>but was hindred by a malfunctioning server. Can someone convert
>>the location given into either Tropical or Sideral zodiacal location?
>
>Oh +0 is equivalent to 0Ari00 in the Siderial Zodiac.  In the tropical this
>is about 25Ari40.  

Are you absolutely sure about this Dave? I have it from a good source
that astronomers use the tropical zodiac. The sidereal zodiac, which
is not equivalent to the zodiacal constellations but is a division of
the sky into 12 equal signs, is, I think, used only by astrologers,
especially those in India.

Astronomers differ from astrologers only in that they express positions
as sidereal time, and in right ascension (i.e., along the equator).
Astrologers express positions as degrees along the ecliptic. So in
truth, the zodiac astronomers use for geocentric positions is not
the tropical zodiac (which is on the ecliptic) but a zodiac on
the equator which has 0 Aries at the Vernal Point. Astronomers do
use the tropical zodiac when specifying heliocentric positions.

From the Larousse Encyclopedia of Astrology: "The vernal point marks
the beginning of measurement of RIGHT ASCENSION on the celestial
equator (... 0 hours 0 minutes 0 seconds) or of CELESTIAL LONGITUDE
on the ecliptic (0^0'0")."

The -s0 option of astrolog expresses positions in sidereal time, as
astronomers do, but these positions are not related to the sidereal
zodiac, in spite of the fact that the -s option provides positions
in the sidereal zodiac. (Walter: Please correct me if I am wrong!)

Sidereal time has nothing to do with the sidereal zodiac. From
the LEA again: "When the VERNAL POINT -- that is, 0^ of celestial
longitude or 0^ Aries -- crosses the Midheaven, the local sidereal
day is considered to begin. At that moment local sidereal time is
0 hours 0 minutes and 0 seconds... The star Aldebaran will cross the 
upper meridian 4 hours and 33 minutes of sidereal time later -- that is,
local sidereal time will then be 4h 33m. Aldebaran will cross the
meridian *every day* at 4h 33m; in fact, that local sidereal time
is a permanent celestial coordinate of that star, called its
RIGHT ASCENSION."

(The Vernal Point is the point on the ecliptic where the Sun lies at
the Vernal Equinox -- 0 Aries in the tropical zodiac.)

>The -s0 option of astrolog gives positions which can be
>directly compared with the reported astronomical position (~ 0h).
>A quick check of shows none of the imaginary trans-plutonian objects fit
>this position (the nearest one is about 45 degrees away):
>
>Astrolog (2.30) chart for 15 September 1992 0:00 (+0:00 GMT)   0'00W  0'00N
>Body  Locat. Ret. Decl. Rul.      House  Rul. Veloc.    Placidus Houses.
>
>Cupi: 15h,17m   + 0,00' ( ) [ 6th house] [ ] +0.016  Uranian #1
>Hade:  4h,31m R + 0,00' ( ) [12th house] [ ] -0.001  Uranian #2
>Zeus: 11h,34m   + 0,00' ( ) [ 6th house] [ ] +0.018  Uranian #3
>Kron:  5h,22m   + 0,00' ( ) [12th house] [ ] +0.002  Uranian #4
>Apol: 13h,01m   + 0,00' ( ) [ 6th house] [ ] +0.014  Uranian #5
>Adme:  3h,02m R + 0,00' ( ) [12th house] [ ] -0.007  Uranian #6
>Vulk:  7h,05m   + 0,00' ( ) [ 1st house] [ ] +0.006  Uranian #7
>Pose: 14h,00m   + 0,00' ( ) [ 6th house] [ ] +0.011  Uranian #8
>
>Better luck next planet!
>

You've listed the Uranian points alone. The point astrologers
call "Transpluto" is currently at 23Leo49 (according to output from
Bluestar). The point hypothesised by the French astrologer Robert
Ambelain is supposed to be at 15Gem43 right now. So it appears that
neither of these correspond to the recently discovered body. I don't
know what other bodies have been hypothesised by astrologers.


Maggie



Newsgroups: alt.astrology