NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Oblique Ascension.
From: Peter Fogg
Date: 2005 Aug 28, 09:33 +1000
From: Peter Fogg
Date: 2005 Aug 28, 09:33 +1000
George wrote > > Am I right in thinking, then, that the star that was rising at the moment > and place of one's birth was regarded as important by astrologers? > > For a particular position on the Earth's surface, it seems to me that all > the stars that were rising at a particular moment would share the same > oblique ascension. Have I got that right? > > Not that I'm attempting to steer Nav-l into discussing the nonsenses of > astrology. Honest. I don't know the answer to the first question, but the information on oblique ascension from the Astrology Encyclopedia seemed to deal with the inter-relationships of bodies located on the celestial sphere with this earthly one; thus common ground. As to the second question, if all bodies appearing at the same instant share the same oblique ascension, then this can be defined as a kind of hour angle, set not at right angles to the equator (like lines of longitude) but at an oblique angle defined by latitude? As to astrology being 'nonsenses'; I wouldn't know, not having studied the subject. Isn't the essence of rational thought not jumping to conclusions without evidence? Isn't taking a fixed position, perhaps based on prejudice, and refusing to look beyond it, something the whole scientific revolution has tried to move beyond?