61
As a spatial/static method, it should therefore eschew anything that has to do with time-consuming rotation - and that includes the Tropical Zodiac, the fiducial of which is the Equator. (The Equator is a product of rotation.)
Ah! Fascinating!

So (if I understand this correctly) the Placidus method of domification might be considered a natural corollary of the tropical zodiac while the Sign/House method might be considered a natural corollary of the sidereal zodiac. Or am I misreading this?

62
Ed,
(the daily/yearly correlation and the use of seasons as analogy, the comment about the meridian belonging only to the semiarc system, and a few other bits).
Spoken like a true pure mathematician. Personally, I didn't think the semi-arc exposition held up without pursuing the seasonal link but there yer go.

As for the meridian belonging to Placidus, even Dieter had to concur with that one (yet he still insists on Campanus - with a swift 'about turn' to the East Point system when things get awkward at the Polar Circles!).
I've also found the "space/time" division distinction less than useful: they're really two faces of the same set of abstractions.
I don't follow you (again).

Thanks for volunteering Koster but I doubt that it's worth the bother. Reading your account, I think I've had about as much as I can stand. Thanks for that.

Mw

63
The local meridian is certainly easy enough to define and visualize on a purely spatial basis: draw a line through the north and south points of the horizon, and through the zenith. Its division into upper and lower parts is a bit more difficult, as you well explain in your articles.

The seasonal analogy is probably completely unnecessary: the plane, orientation and "natural" fiducial of a Placidus mundo measure, or of a tropical zodiac can be established based on the velocity, force and gravity vectors of the earth and sun respectively on the native. Same for a lunar "zodiac" if you want one (or for an astrology for natives on the moon or venus or mars). Of course, as in most applied mathematics, it's a matter of agreement on suitable conventions for one's description/model of the reality so that all concerned have a common understanding of it.

64
Andrew

Yes, I think you probably are. And unless I?m misreading you, there's no reason not to apply Placidus to the Siderial. I have tried to lay out the choices that have to be made before adopting Sign/house but otherwise have no opinion on the matter.

Ed

Like Wemyss, you take for granted the (spatial) N/S Meridian. I don?t, which is why the seasonal stuff was necessary. (?Probably totally unnescessary.? !? - Only ?probably?? ) But the main reason for its inclusion was to help justify the multi-cusps, which it does. I had expected to get the most flak of all for advocating what will seem to some a completely alien and unacceptable concept. Mathematical models alone may work for you but they wouldn?t convince most other astrologers.

A shame really - we appear to see eye to eye on everything else mundane.

There are a couple of other matters but I?ll communicate privately.

65
Mike,

No problem having a few minor differences of perspective (well, I'm pretty sure that's what they are). I don't have any problem with the multi-cusp observation you describe.

I will reread your presentation to see if I understand your point better.

Cheers,

- Ed

66
Libra Sun, so like all things equal, unless I get a bigger slice. :P
I like Equal as it's consistent regards house cusps which is important to the way I do astrology. Those natal charts in Scandanavia don't look too good when you have 5 cusps ruled by one sign. It is do-able and in the minority but not consistent.

12 signs all of 30 degrees, along with 12 equal house cusps, fits.
Though I do have to stop when I reach the MC and also the 10th house cusp. Like a few nuts and bolts left over after doing DIY.

67
Do you mean equal as in the Equal House system advocated by Margaret Hone (12 equal houses from the Ascendant) or equal as in the Whole Sign/House system (as in Hellenistic astrology)?