For astrology program radical charts or radical chart listings is there a common rule by what speed a planet is marked as stationary? Not meant are general ephemeris listings here.

I'm programming an astrology program and mark planet speeds in charts like this yet:
Speed smaller than +-60" seconds = stationary (symbol 'S')
Speed smaller than +-10" seconds = stationary exact (symbol 'SE')

Would it be useful to mark the stationary phases more detailed?

What kind of stationary types are common or useful? And what is the common speed for each type and its symbol. For example:

1. Stationary (symbol 'S') = speed?
2. Stationary retrograd (symbol 'SR') = speed?
3. Stationary direct (symbol 'SD') = speed?
4. Stationary exact (symbol '?') = speed?

You need to classify each Galaxy and find their Speed. So far I understand each galaxy moves with its own speed rather than a universal velocity. And the directions are facing outward.

Hope that it helped.

with solar fire software you can personally alter the window of time according to your personal preference.. i have a 6 day window showing when a planet is stationary. i think it is extremely important data to know about as i think stationary planets have a big impact on charts.. not sure if any of this feedback helps you..

Interesting. I hadn't thought about it enough before. Natal charts don't seem to show if a planet is stationary, and it is very important. I read a recent article on Astrodienst saying that Mercury stationary is common in writers' charts, and I had recently posted the chart of the writer Helen Bailey on this forum; I looked in the ephemeris and her Mercury is indeed stationary, it had been moving retrograde for four days, but I wouldn't have known without looking at the ephemeris. Maybe you wouldn't count that as exactly stationary? I suppose you are referring to the very slow moving outer planets that really do seem to be stopped for about a week?

hi fleur,

i am not sure your comment was directed at me, but i will respond either way to you. i am mostly thinking about the outer planets, but i do think the idea of stationary planets and their importance is ignored for the most part.. it is mostly treated like a black and white kind of thing - either retro or forward motion, with little to no in between.. generally if it is stationary moving retro - the western traditionalists have been told it is negative... indian astrology seems to have adopted a more nuanced approach to retro and don't see it the same way as i understand it.. i haven't read much of anything from either school commenting on stationary positions and from what i have read, it is generally overlooked or ignored..

there are a lot of astronomical dynamics to astrology that seem to get neglected.. just how much weight one gives a stationary planet is going to be subjective, but i do think it is relevant.. generally speaking a stationary planet accentuates the planet and puts it's energies more in focus for the chart under consideration.. with a chart where this same planet is also highlighted by being in the angles or something like that - i think it becomes quite central to the chart.. i offer chris hadfields chart as an example for consideration to explore this idea more..

In line with western traditional astrology and some experience, albeit limited, I regard slow moving planets as in a sick state and a stationery planet in a very poor state indeed.

James for me if I were to regard a stationery planet as having more emphasis then it would be in an adverse way depending on its house position.

Regarding Helen Bailey, I would use her retrograde Mercury in some attempt at rectification. Since she met such a terrible end my first thought would be to associate this Mercury in some way with House 7, 8 or 12, either by aspect or location.

James I would be interested to look at the chart you mention.

Please let us stay to the topic and don't discuss the meaning of stationary planets here. There are already other threads about it.

Hi Fleur,

Fleur wrote:Interesting. I hadn't thought about it enough before. Natal charts don't seem to show if a planet is stationary, and it is very important.

I only know astrology programs that do mark planets as stationary with an 'S'. In their radical chart graphics and in their radical chart listings. For example Solar Fire or Astrodienst online computation.

Fleur wrote:I suppose you are referring to the very slow moving outer planets that really do seem to be stopped for about a week?

Sorry you might think this because of the typo in my initial post. The speed values I wrote were way to small (now corrected).

I speak about planets in at least two different states (no matter if its an inner or outer planet). One of them if a planet is very slow and therefore is marked stationary and the other if its motion nearly stopped. For the latter I use the term 'exact stationary' (don't know if there is a common term for this). For example William Lilly's radical Neptune got a daily speed of 0.4" seconds.

Hi james_m,

thank you very much for the tip that Solar Fire allows a user defined handling of marking stationary planets. I wasn't aware about this option in the Preferences/Stations dialog. So I will give these different options a closer look. Its a good idea to give the user the opportunity to choose their own way when a planet is marked as stationary.

Because Astrodienst (astro.com) is kind of a reference in astrology computations in meanwhile I was looking how they handle this question in their free online calculations. They mark stationary planets based on their daily approximately mean speed:

Astrodienst marks a planet as stationary (S) at following daily speed:
Mercury < 5' = S
Venus < 3' = S
Mars < 1' = S
Jupiter < 1' = S
Saturn < 1' = S
Uranus < 20" = S
Neptune < 10" = S
Pluto < 10" = S

Mars, Jupiter and Saturn got the same values. Although their daily mean speed differ significantly. So its a very rough raster they use. But handling all planets in a different manner based on a percent value of their mean maximum speed seems a very logic approach to me.

The last option in Solar Fire (Preferences/Stations: 'When speed relative to average is less than percent') allows the same handling.

Astrodienst don't use the single symbol 'S' for an stationary planet. They always asign them either as SR (stationary retrograd) or SD (stationary direct) motion.

But Astrodienst doesn't mark stationary planets when they are nearly exact stationary. For example if Mercury speed is below 10" seconds or Saturn speed is below 5" seconds.

To me a planet signed as nearly exact stationary is also an important information. Is there a common symbol for this state yet? I might have seen the symbol 'D' for this anywhere. But I'm not sure. Does anybody know more about it?

hi chris,

i thought solar fire had the info on the chart - but it is on the inside in chart analysis - it will give DS for jupiter in 2 days time.. 3 days out and it is SR.. it also show the movement being made and etc, so it is there for someone who is interested in it, but it is not immediately visible on the chart itself just where in the cycle it is.. that is another reason why i have a wider window for this software... if i want to know when it is exact, i can go look..

good luck with the programming!

Chris Meyer wrote:Please let us stay to the topic and don't discuss the meaning of stationary planets here. There are already other threads about it.

Ok sorry. In passing, I mention that I am finding that I need to check the ephemeris for stationary planets in a natal chart. In the Astrodienst chart of President Kennedy http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Kennedy,_John_F.
his Uranus is only shown as retrograde, but in the ephemeris Uranus does look to go retrograde exactly on 29th May 1917, the day he was born. To me that looks stationary, and highly significant. Also his Mercury stations to go direct on 29th May exactly.

Hi Fleur,

Fleur wrote:In the Astrodienst chart of President Kennedy http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Kennedy,_John_F.
his Uranus is only shown as retrograde, but in the ephemeris Uranus does look to go retrograde exactly on 29th May 1917, the day he was born. To me that looks stationary, and highly significant. Also his Mercury stations to go direct on 29th May exactly.

Yes you are right. Kennedy got a stationary Mercury and Uranus. He's a good example that stationary planets are indicators for positive strenghts.
Astrodienst shows stationary details only in their 'additional tables (PDF)'. There you can see that Mercury is marked as SD = stationary direct and Uranus = stationary retrograde. Also the exact 'Speed' is listed in the PDF tables.
You can find the link for the 'additional tables (PDF)' in the enlarged natal chart view above the chart graphics. Don't know why Astrodienst doesn't show this in the chart view.