Here is article by Per Dahlin to alt.astrology. Note, that Per Dahlin has now new E-mail address - pdahlin@tripnet.se From: capella@algonet.se ( Per Dahlin) Newsgroups: alt.astrology Subject: Re: MC and houses in Polar Zone Date: Sun, 25 Aug 96 11:39:25 GMT Organization: Aliens in Space Lines: 360 Message-ID: <4vpdpk$jcb@epimetheus.algonet.se> References: <4uviq0$bim@horos.kbfi.ee> NNTP-Posting-Host: sophocles.algonet.se NNTP-Posting-User: b655715be89ae3d3d93c87732e2a5b740 X-Newsreader: News Xpress 2.0 Beta #2 Re. the "problem" with MC, Ascendant and House Cusps in the polar zones. Personally I cannot see that there is any problem, but since most astro- logical computer programs still calculates the cusps wrongly it seems that many astrologers still have problems to understand this. For this reason follows an explanations of it... The background to this problem, or misunderstanding, is the fact that the formulas for calculating the MC, Ascendant and House Cusps are for "normal" lati- tudes. Remember, Astrology (and the civilization with the mathematical skills) origin from countries near the equator. House Tables is never calculated for polar latitudes (except: 'Alcabitius Tables for Houses for latitudes 0 - 90 North/South'), and most programmers that have done astrological computer programs have never reflected upon this issue. For "normal" latitudes (that is from approx. 66.5 degree North to 66.5 degree South Geographic Lati- tude), there is never a problem to calculate the Ascendant and MC (and also most House Cusps, since they often depends on the prior calculation of the Ascendant and/or MC). But beyond these latitudes - north of approx. 66.5 degree North and south of approx. 66.5 degree South, there can be problems. The reason for this is that the earth axis is til- ted approx. 23.5 degrees, which also have an effect on the earth itself as the four seasons (spring, summer, autumn, winter). North Pole / ----/ <--- Sun beams, summer on / / \ <--- the northern hemisphere. | Earth | <--- North Arctic will always \ / / <--- have summer; South Arctic ----- <--- will always have winter. / South Pole And the effect of this is also that areas approx. 23.5 degrees from the North and South Poles will during part of the year never receive the Sun beams (= always night) and the opposite, always receive the Sun Beams (= always day). The Sun's apparent movement during a year (as seen from the Earth) defines the Tropical Zodiac, and the measure points are where the night and day are of equal length (spring and autumn equinox) and when day and night is of maximum length (summer and winter equinox). The equivalent points on the Tropical Zodiac is zero degrees Aries-Libra and Cancer-Capricorn. At the summer equinox, around the 21st of June every year (in the northern hemispehere), Sun will always be over the horizon (visible = Sun's beams) in the North Arctic (= from approx. 66.5 North - North Pole). And the opposite, Sun will always be under the horizon (invisible = no Sun beams) in the South Arctic (= from approx. 66.5 South - South Pole). This phenomena is called Circumpola- rity (never ascends, never descends). Since the Sun's apparent movement defines the Tropical Zodiac (known as the Ecliptic among Astro- nomers), the same will happen with the Tropical Zodiac, which means that there is part of the Tropi- cal Zodiac that always/never will be above/below the horizon. These areas are around zero degree Cancer/ Capricorn, and the areas increases nearer the poles. MC/IC MC/IC is defined as the intersection between the Zodiac and the Meridian (a Meridian is a circle or line that goes around the earth from pole to pole over any place on the earth, and it coincides with the Geographical Longitudes). The difference between MC and IC is that MC is always above the horizon and the IC is always below the horizon. And since areas around zero degree Cancer/Capricorn will always/never be above/below the horizon in the Arctic, the same is true for MC/IC. For instance, MC can never appear as 0 degree Capricorn in the North Arctic, nor can 0 degree Cancer appear as IC there. And the opposite is true for the South Arctic. For instance, take the date 24 AUG 1996 and the Lati- tude of 67.00 North and Longitude (Meridian) 0.00 East/West and 0 hour Time Zone. At 19h48m (7.48 pm) most astrological computer programs will calculate the MC to 0.20 Capricorn, which is a impossible value!!! The correct position for MC at this time is 0.20 Cancer! If your astrological computer program gives the wrong position it means that it calculate MC as if it didn't exist any Arctic zones with the circum- polarity effect. MC will always be above the horizon, but when this happens that the MC/IC axis is within the circum- polarity zones, the direction (North/South) will change. Normally, in the northern latitudes, MC is in the south direction, but in the North Arctic it can be in the north direction. The opposite is true on the south hemisphere. The Horoscope Wheel is drawn with the 4 directions as reference; east to the left side, west to the right side, south at the top and north at the bottom. So when MC appears in the opposite direc- tion it will be drawn somewhere at the bottom at the horoscope wheel like this... South IC "This side is BELOW ----/ the horizon" / / \ East ---- |---/---|-- Horizon West \ / / ----- / "This side is ABOVE MC the horizon" North And this makes most astrologers confused because they are not used to see the Horoscope Wheel like this. But just because MC is in the north doesn't mean that it's under the horizon. In fact the oppo- site, MC IS ALWAYS ABOVE THE HORIZON!!! (as IC IS ALWAYS BELOW THE HORIZON). So, this means that we must change how we look upon the horoscope - when MC is in a circumpolar zone. ASCENDANT/DESCENDANT The Ascendant/Descendant is defined as the inter- section between the Zodiac and the (Geocentric) Horizon. The word Geocentric means that we assume that the horizon crosses the center of the earth and not the surface of the earth, because of prac- tical problems to define the horizon, for instance if we are deep down in a mine or 30,000 feet above the ground in a airplane. And because of the enorm- ous distance between the earth and the other "pla- nets" there is no real side effect of using the geocentric horizon. The difference between Ascendant and the Descen- dant is that the Ascendant is always rising and the Descendant is always descending. Due to the fact that some parts of the Zodiac never can appear above or below the horizon in the Arctic zones, this also means that the same is true for the Ascendant/Descendant, because these points is where above the horizon turns to below the horizon and vice versa. For instance, the Ascendant AND the Descendant can never appear as 0 degree Cancer/Capricorn in the Arctic zones. Since the same phenomena appears to both the Ascen- dant and the Descendant the only way to know whether the Ascendant really is the Ascendant (and not the Descendant) is to prove that it is ascending and not descending. They are both points on the Zodiac, and when one of them ascends the opposite point descends. So if we look on a point at the Tropical Zodiac near the Ascendant or Descendant and check how that point is moving, then we can prove that it is ascending or descending. If we use the same example again, 24 AUG 1996, lati- tude 67.00 North and longitude 00.00 East/West, Time Zone 0h and Time 19h48m (7.48 PM) then the Ascendant is 12 degrees in Pisces - or Virgo?! If we redo the calculation 2 minutes later on, at 19h50m /7.50 PM) the Ascendant is at 23 degrees Aquarius - or Leo!? At the same time Sun will be 2 degrees in Virgo at it will descend at 19h49m / 7.49 PM (where Sun's position is at the Descendant), which means that also the nearby position 12 degrees Virgo is des- cending just one minute earlier. The time for the Sun's ascension/descension can easily be calculated (if it's not circumpolar!). So, the opposite point - Pisces is the Ascendant - and Virgo is Descendant. If your computer programs shows the opposite it calculates the Ascendant wrong! Interesting to see is that the Ascendant ALWAYS is retrograde when MC is in a circumpolarity zone! Due to the fact that we draw the horoscope with the four directions as reference points, the horoscope will look like this South IC "This side is BELOW ----/ the horizon" / / \ East Asc --|---/---|-- Desc West \ / / ----- / "This side is ABOVE MC the horizon" North HOUSES The houses, according to most house systems, are calculated from the positions of the Ascendant and/ or MC. So if the Ascendant and MC is calculated wrongly so will also the house cusps. By changing direction for the MC so that the drawn horoscope look "upside-down" does not really change the positions for the house cusps (disregarding all the weird systems that exists). So the houses 12, 11, 10, 9, 8 and 7 will ALWAYS be on the same side as the MC - as they always is! And the opposite for the remaining houses (1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 will ALWAYS be on the same side as the IC). South IC 2 3 /4 "This side is BELOW ----/ 5 the horizon" 1 / / \ 6 East Asc --|---/---|-- Desc West 12 \ / / 7 11 ----- 8 10 / 9 "This side is ABOVE MC the horizon" North But remember, this is ONLY how the horoscope will look like when MC is in a circumpolar part of the Zodiac, causing it to be in the opposite direction (south-north), and the Ascendant is ascending retrograde. HOW TO CHECK WHETHER OR NOT MC IS CIRCUMPOLAR This check is only needed to be done when the geo- graphic latitude is higher than approx. 66.5 degree north or south (90 - Ecliptic Oblique). The Eclip- tic Oblique is the tilt of the Earth (it's value can be found in most astrological ephemerides, or calculated). Calculate the MC, Ascendant and House Cusps the normal way (as shown in any good astrological book). You will now have the positions as if it didn't exist any polar zones with the circumpola- rity effect. 1) Convert the positions to it's 360-value (for instance, 5 degree Virgo is 155; 20 degrees Aquarius is 320 etc.). 2) Calculate MC - ASC (the position for MC minus the position for the Ascendant). 3) If the result in point 2 is less than zero (a minus value) then add 360 degrees to the result. 4) If the result then is more than 180 (between 180 and 360) then MC is NOT circumpolar, and the positions for the MC and Ascendant is as calcu- lated. And the horoscope is drawn in the normal way. But, if the result is less than 180 (between 0 and 180) then MC is in an circumpolar zone. The calculated MC is in fact the IC and the cal- culated Ascendant is in fact the Descendant, and the Ascendant is also retrograde. For this reason, add 180 degrees to the calculated MC and add 180 degrees to the calculated Ascendant. Also, add a minus sign (by multiplying with -1) to the Ascen- dant to indicate that it is retrograde. The Horo- scope should then be drawn as shown above. For the House Cusps the following correction must be done, IF MC is circumpolar. 1) House Cusp 2 is House Cusp 6 + 180 degrees. House Cusp 3 is House Cusp 5 + 180 degrees. House Cusp 5 is House Cusp 3 + 180 degrees. House Cusp 6 is House Cusp 2 + 180 degrees. Note: Two of the most common used House Systems - Koch and Placidus cease to exists in the Arctic, which shows that artificially constructed houses systems should not be used (remember, both Placidus and Koch is "new" inventions done by mathematicians; Placidus house system was invented around year 1650 by the Italian monk, mathematician and astrologer Placido de Tito, and Koch house system was invented around 1965 by the German astrologer Walter Koch together with an Austrian named Knappich). Koch house cusps cannot be calculated when MC is circumpolar, because this house system requires that this point on the Zodiac should be able to ascend/descend. Placidus house cusps cannot be calculated when they are circumpolar, because this house system requires that these points should both be able to ascend/ descend as well as culminate. Placidus house system is funny in it's way, because it must be calculated out from guess-work! I find it remarkable that W. Koch & Knappich didn't realize this when they "invented" their house systems, but I'm quite sure that their mathematical skills was not very good. Looking at the formulas, it's just another, older house system calculated back- wards! For this reason, of all the 50+ or so house system available, do not use either Placidus or Koch. The only house system that I personally can recommend to use is Alcabitius, the oldest of all known house system, and the only house system that equally divides the zodiac in time from sunrise to sunset - as people (before using clocks) always have measured time and divided the day in equal hours. Note: I found that in the shareware program 'Astrolog v. 5.20' the Alcabitius house cusps is totally wrong. Also, this is one of the many astrological computer programs that calculate MC and ASC wrong when MC/IC is in a circumpolar part of the Zodiac. Best Regards, Per Dahlin Astrologiska Institutet, Box 167, S-792 23 Mora, SWEDEN. E-mail: capella@algonet.se Here is my answer, posted to alt.astrology at 29th Aug. 1996 I reference shortly your point of view: In situations you named circumpolar, Asc and MC must be flipped to opposite side relatively to positions, calculated by formulas for "normal" latitudes. As result, houses order on Zodiac must be reversed, as shown on your illustration: > > South IC > 2 3 /4 "This side is BELOW > ----/ 5 the horizon" > 1 / / \ 6 > East Asc --|---/---|-- Desc West > 12 \ / / 7 > 11 ----- 8 > 10 / 9 "This side is ABOVE > MC the horizon" > North > But problem exists, and it is problem of definitions. ASCENDANT/DESCENDANT Defined as the intersection between the Zodiac and the Horizon. To found, which intersection point is Ascendant, we must look dynamic of this point in time that it is ascending and not descending. In circumpolar situations Asc must be flipped relatively to position, given by formulas for "normal" latitudes. As I understand, this definiton matches with your point of view. MC/IC Defined as the intersection between the Zodiac and the Meridian. But which point is MC? Look two definitions: #1 (Static) Which point is highest point relatively to horizon? #2 (Dynamic) Which point CULMINATE at the moment relatively to horizon? Outside polar zone both definitions shows to same intersection point. You use definition #1, and in circumpolar situations MC must be flipped relatively to position, given by latitude-undependent formula. With flipping of ASC it causes also reverting of houses order on zodiac. Definition #2 always shows to point, given by latitude-undependent formula. In circumpolar situations this MC is under horizon. But it is point, which CULMINATE, that mean have its highest elevation for the day. One second earlyer or later it would be lower than the chart moment. Definition #2 seems more true. Reasons: 1) In most astrology books I have read, MC is defined as CULMINATION point of ecliptics. It matches to definition #2. 2) We use for both ASC and MC dynamic definitions, thet mean, to find, which intersection point is ASC (MC) we must look dynamic of both points in time, not dynamic for ASC and static (only by position) for MC. 3) Because in circumpolar situations is flipped only ASC, houses saves his normal order on Zodiac. No need more to reverse houses order. Wheel looks like South MC 11 / "This side is BELOW ----/ 9 the horizon" 12/ / \ 8 East Asc --|---/---|-- Desc West 2 \ / / 6 3 ----- 5 / "This side is ABOVE IC the horizon" North Best regards, Valentin Abramov valja@tartu.customs.ee http://b2400z.customs.ee/valja.html