skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

The New Planets in the Outer Solar System
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Philosophy & Science
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
skippy



Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 88
Location: england

Posted: Thu Jul 13, 2006 3:36 pm    Post subject: The New Planets in the Outer Solar System Reply with quote

There have been a number of discoveries of new planets around Pluto and the jury is still out as to whether they can come in from the cold.

what will that mean for us astrologers who amongst will assign meaning to these new findings. I remember Linda Goodman saying 'when they discover Vulcan' we will be start to be able to read each others minds which I know is populist crap but you know what I mean.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 4130
Location: England

Posted: Fri Jul 14, 2006 8:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If they keep the convention of using names from mythology, I suppose itís only a matter of time before they discover something and call it Vulcan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3435
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Sun Jul 16, 2006 12:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
what will that mean for us astrologers who amongst will assign meaning to these new findings.


What possible astrological significance could an object have that takes 10,500 years for a single revolution?

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
borealis



Joined: 05 Nov 2005
Posts: 132

Posted: Sun Jul 16, 2006 6:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hmm:) Maybe we should ask the dinasaurs:)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
###



Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 1380

Posted: Sun Jul 16, 2006 10:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
What possible astrological significance could an object have that takes 10,500 years for a single revolution?


Thatís a long time and very little movement. Could a major aspect from such a slow-moving object indicate that the chart native has a need for routine colonic maintenance?




I think I may have said something crude. Embarassed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
granny_skot



Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 1634
Location: California, USA

Posted: Sun Jul 16, 2006 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

10,500 years... sounds like a definition more for galactic life events rather than serious input for local human events. just a thought, granny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sue



Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 945
Location: Australia

Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 11:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Skippy,

As a traditional astrologer I don't even use Uranus, Neptune and Pluto very often. I am very unlikely to use any other planets that are discovered. I suppose it depends a lot on how you view astrology and the way that planets affect us. The idea of only using the visible planets makes sense to me because there is an obvious visual connection that can be easily identified. There are also several other connections with the seven planets including the hermetic idea of the seven grades. With the jury still out about whether Pluto should have planet status or not I imagine it might be difficult for astrologers who use Pluto if it is downgraded. And with Pluto being such a new discovery, 76 years compared to thousands for some of the others, I'm not sure we can expect to understand it in the same way we can understand the visible planets. I cannot see, even if we choose to include them, how we can make good use of them until extensive research can be done on them.I think there is often a rush to try to start interpreting these discoveries without much thought. Look what happened when Chirion was discovered in 1977. It didn't take long for the books to start rolling out on what it all meant and Chiron hadn't gone through a complete cycle when these books were published. I was just trying to remember the name of the thing (planet or something) that was discovered fairly recently. Oh yes, Sedna. There was so much written about that and, if I remember correctly, the tsunami was blamed on Sedna. I think most astrologers will always be interested in any new information of this type. However, I really baulk at the idea of putting something in the chart just because it is there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
skippy



Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 88
Location: england

Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 11:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="Sue"]
I think most astrologers will always be interested in any new information of this type. However, I really baulk at the idea of putting something in the chart just because it is there.[/quote]

Hmmm,
What are the parallels to the outer planets with traditional astrology
for exampel,

Ok lets look at some outer planetary meanings. Pluto obsession, deep penetrative, thought, research investigation blah blah blah,

or

Uranus new techonology, internet, higher achievement, genius blah blah blah. Traditionally, these things did not come along until after this planet was discovered.

Neptune, can't think of anything definative about neptune that cannot be equated with Jupiter.

Chiron - where you wound and where you heal, holistic s'pose that could be Saturn in traditional Astrology and given Chiron was son of Saturn that ain't surprising non.

Yeah I see what you are saying. I have an area where the outer planets and chiron are aspecting tight and heavy on my venus and sure feels real to me though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
skippy



Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 88
Location: england

Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

one more thing..

Pluto, Chiron, Lilleth etc are all mythological archetypes from an ancient religion from which astrology was engendered. Thus they are Semiotics.

So.. couldn't we just argue then that these archetypes exist anyway and have no bearing on astrology whatsover..Mind you I find that argument, looking at my own chart, highly unlikely.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sue



Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 945
Location: Australia

Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 1:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lee Lehman talks about a study she did whereby she went through all of the words and phrases that were used to describe the three outer planets and compiled lists. She says she discovered that virtually all of these words were words traditionally used to describe Saturn. So she says that even though the modern astrologers accuse traditional astrologers of being fatalistic it is the modern astrologers who have added three malefics to the smaller group of malefics that the traditional astrologers have.

Quote:
So.. couldn't we just argue then that these archetypes exist anyway and have no bearing on astrology whatsover.


Yes. In a sense you are right. These archetypes do exist. But I wouldn't say that they have no bearing on astrology. I am reading an interesting book at the moment by Ernst Cassirer that is part two in a three volume set. This particular one is on 'Mythical Thought'. It is not an astrology book but I have read several of his books and he almost always talks about astrology. In this particular book he says:

Quote:
For astrology every occurrence in the world, every genesis and new formation is fundamentally illusion; what is expressed in the world process, what lies behind it, is a predetermined fate, a uniform determination of being, which asserts itself identically throughout the moments of time. Thus, the whole of a man's life is contained and decided in its beginning, in the constellation of the hour of his birth; and, in general, growth presents itself not as a genesis but as a simple permanence and an explanation of this permanence. The form of existence and life is not produced from the most diverse elements, from an interweaving of the most diverse causal conditions; from the very outset it is given as a finished form which need only be explained, which for us onlookers seems to unfold in time. And this law of the whole is repeated in each of its parts. The predetermination of being applies to the individual as applies to the universe.


When I read this I was reminded of Plato's idea that everything is within us and that a teacher is not someone who introduces information from without to within but rather draws the information that is within to without. I wonder how this idea relates to the belief by some astrologers that a planet is discovered when we are ready to take on board the archetype of that planet. Obviously these new discoveries are only new in the sense of the new awareness of their existence. If everything is already within and our lives are simply an unfoldment of all that is within then are these discoveries part of that unfoldment?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3435
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 2:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Skippy,

The objects I was referring to were Kuper belt objects that were further out than "Sedna." Sedna has an 8 or 9000 year orbit I think. I hadn't seen anything with a 60 year orbit.

Like Sue I rarely use the three outers, so adding to them doesn't appeal to me either. They can be used like fixed stars. I would never consider using them as sign rulers.

If I recall Lehman correctly, most of the stuff attributed to Neptune used to belong to the Moon, Pluto picked up some Mars stuff, and I forget where the Uranus stuff came from. Mercury is possible. When I get home I'll have to look it up.

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
borealis



Joined: 05 Nov 2005
Posts: 132

Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 5:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Im a bit off topic here but, yeah, I heard that before. Phillip Graves wrote a nice little bit on horoscope chat regarding uranus:

"Seen sometimes as a 'higher octave' of Mercury, Uranus enables communication without the conventional mechanism of speech and physical conduction methods. It is therefore associated with radio waves,..."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sue



Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 945
Location: Australia

Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 9:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm afraid I don't hold with the idea of Mercury being the higher octave of Mercury or Mars being the higher octave of Pluto. It suggests that Uranus is just Mercury in a stronger form, which is not true.

The best book I have read on Uranus is 'Prometheus the Awakener' by Richard Tarnas. If you are intereseted in the archetypes of the outer planets then this book is definitely one to read. As the name suggests, he is proposing that Uranus better fits the myth of Prometheus than that of Uranus.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
skippy



Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 88
Location: england

Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Sue
that book sounds interesting. It seems to be the view of Jonathan Cainer that symbolically and energetically there is a meeting from the outer planets to ourselves. If, however, we use the traditional argument that pragmatically a planet at the edge of solar system does not have a gravitiational pull it doesn't have any bearing. Though I can't help but wonder about the industrial revolution that happened once uranus was discovered and the science breakthroughs once pluto was discovered. I really cannot see it where neptune is concerned. They say hypnotism and anaesthesia were discovered but these things were around long before that in other traditions such as Chinese culture, they just didn't use the same methods.

There are some major shifts happening in the globe today which may be affected by the discovery of these new planets but they can equally be explained by our current systems too. However, Pluto is going through Saggitarius at the moment. Road rage is a phenomenon that is sweeping the UK (drivers getting out of their cars and committing physcial violence to other drivers) obviously 'T'rerrism (as Bush would say) is happening on a world scale, id cards on a mass scale, Global economies etc. Liz Green as ever discusses these well I think. I agree with the Prometheus argument but again it is just semantics as the archetypes are quite similar. You will get overlap with meaning, since really there are very few words to describe personality types in essence. The Greeks distilled it to just four types didn't they.

Tom the planet I'm talking about is 2003 UB313. Sorry this takes twice the time Pluto does to orbit the sun 560 years they estimate which on a transformational level is enough to warrant change on our planet. Since Astronomers and Astrologers have parted ways I really cannot see the energy of this planet has anything to do with the archetypal energy of Lila and the nearest to that in our tradition would be mercury. Is this indeed Vulcan?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3435
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 2:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi guys,

I`ve never been taken with the idea that newly discovered planets reflect the times in which they were discoveredand therefore "rule" those things prominent at that time. the problem is exactly what Skippy pointed out: there are other parts of the world besides the USA and Western Europe. Furthermore, it is a selective attitude. Neptune was discovered at the time of the first "total" wars, the Crimean war and the American Civil War, plus it was discovered about the time of the first WMD, the Gattling Gn. Yet, no one associates Neptune with war or warefare. So why does anesthesia make Neptune the ruler of drugs, but modern warfare still gets Mars? There are other examples. Evangeline Adams famous prediction of WWII was, as far as we can tell, based solely on the ingress of Uranus into Aquarius. That may not be much but she predicted American involvement by January 1942. That was within one month of the attack on Pearl Harbor. It may be only one signification, but right is right. Still I wouldn`t recommend the method.

In short, the assignation of contemporary issues to a newly dsicovered planet seems like a solution in search of a problem. Road rage has been a phenonmen in the US for more years than Pluto has been in Sagittarius, and my own opinion is that these things are more the result of media emphasis than any actual increase in the events depited. The most famous case was in the American South. One woman chased anoher for 20 or more miles just to force the other off the road whereupon the perpetrator got out of the car and killed the woman she was chasing

In terms of the world, I read where the latter half of the 20th century was one of the most peaceful in world history, especiallywhen you think of it in in terms of pecapita. Sure more people were killed but as a pecentage of the total population, it was less than in the past and there were fewere wars. That isn`t to say it was heaven on earth, but only to put it into perspective. Contemporary times always seem like the end is near no matter when contemporary happens to be. It makes us seem a lot tougher than we probably are if we can tell others how difficult our lives have been.

This is not to say that there are no significant changes in the world or that there is no danger. Clearly there is. I`m only trying to put it in perspective and point out that the closer we are to a subject, the more difficult it is to be objective.

What do the outers have to do with the world? I`m not sure I do know that many, many modern astrologers overempasize them in nativites, and even in mundane. We`re all getting geared up for the dreaded Saturn - Neptune opposition and no one has looked at the last Saturn Jupiter conjunction at all, much less to see if that chart is affected by Saturn - Neptune. I`m forever coming across natal delineations of the Neptune - Pluto sextile that was in effect in the late 40s and early 50s depending on the orbs used. There must be close to a billion people with that configuration still alive. What could it possibly mean in a natal reading?

So, if 84 year orbits are so-so in effect and 175 and 240 year orbits are barely acceptable, what then of 560 degree orbits? Forget Sedna. If there is mundane significance to the outers, let someone demonstrate it and not just claim it. Until then I think we`re far better served by emphasizing the 7 classical planets.

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Philosophy & Science All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 1 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated