--- In [email protected], doctor_gabby_savy
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > See Vaj's post about frames of reference. Somehow
> > you've managed to confuse at least two different ones.
I believe Vaj is referring to observational points of reference.
Indeed one has a different view from earth, the sun or the pole star.
I am using a constant observational frame of reference with respect to
VE and the postition of the sun.
Another frame of reference is "calculational". From earth you could
report the distance to the sun in miles or kilometers. The number is
different, the distance is the same.
I believe you are using two different calculational reference points,
tropical and sideral, in the same single observation of the sun at VE.
This will cause confusion. To reconcile this confusion, you appear to
believe the error is my using of two observational reference points.
I am not. I beleive the confusion is from your use of two
calculational RPs for the same observational RP.
>
> Perhaps.
>
> > As I suggested earlier, the day-to-day position
> > the sun in the Zodiac is an entirely different frame
> > of reference from the position of the sun from year
> > to year at the time of the vernal equinox.
>
> And your reasoning for why that is so is not clear.
>
> > In the latter frame of reference, this year the sun
> > will be in Pisces at the time of the vernal equinox
> > (it'll enter Aquarius in 2013).
>
> > However, in the
> > former frame of reference, this year the sun will be
> > in the first degree of Aries at the vernal equinox.
>
> I think you are confusing sideral and tropical frames of reference.
> In sideral frame (the one used in jyotish) this year the sun will be
> in Pisces at the time of the vernal equinox and (again) this year the
> sun will be Pisces at the vernal equinox.
Slight Correction. Sideral view takes precession into account.
Jyotish uses an Ayanamsa -- a factor to convert tropical to sideral.
(the celestial mechanics are calculated in tropical,then converted)
Thus, the point of sideral is that, among other things, I beleive VE
will always be when the sun is at the cusp of Aries and Pisces. It
will always occur in relation to the actual stars at the cusp.
This assumes the sun actually retreats a bit at VE, tropically -- due
to precession. Which could be shown graphically pretty clearly, but
harder in words. That assumption may be the point of difference
between us.
To verify, I just ran a jyotish chart for the 2006 VE which has about
a 24 degree ayanasma "adjustment". Sun is a few degrees into Aries
-- which may be a longitude thing, and perhaps my ayanasma is off a
bit. Just as it should be for a constant aries cusp in sideral view
over long spans of time.
On the other hand, tropical will an unadjusted date for VE. Since
precession causes (the real) VE to occur slightly earlier over time,
the date of VE must slowly change over time. In 200 year span its not
noticable. In 2100 years or so, it will shift a month. In 13000 years
it will shift 6 months.
Due to a regularly updated ayansama every century or so, in sideral
view VE will always be at cusp of Aries and Pisces. 1n 13000 years it
will have an ayanamsa of 180 degrees. Thus converting from sideral to
tropical, VE in tropical will be on cusp of Virgo. And in earth
weather, tropical view, september is fall weather.
> > The *words* are the same ("The sun is in X
> > constellation at the vernal equinox"), but because
> > the frames of reference are entirely different, what
> > "X" is in each case is also entirely different.
>
> I fail to see the distinction. I run a jyotish program, with a visual
> transit feature a lot. In current time freame, when the sun is in
> pisces at the VE it is march. When the sun is in Virgo it is
> september. The sun is not in two different constallations at the same
> time. It is in two only superficially. Though in the same spot,
> tropical view puts it in Aries, and sideral view puts it in Pisces. I
> think thats where you are confusing your frames.
>
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing
http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
