--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <noozg...@...> wrote: > > tartbrain wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <noozguru@> wrote: > > > >> You're probably not into astrology > >> > > > > Never have been into western and new age astrology -- no interest even in > > the exploratory years of Summer of Love era. > > > > However, I have dabbled a little in jytoish, having more respect for a > > discernable tradition. (Not that a tradition makes anything correct, having > > roots on ancient ways is to me, at least interesting. I can't fully > > subscribe to the view that all currents of modernity and progress are > > necessarily superior to older ways and insights.) When wring the original > > post, it struck me that 1930 was 80 years ago. Every 20 years, Jupiter and > > Saturn cojoin -- though in new houses. Thus four cycles of that. Not sure > > that means anything at all -- but an interesting coincidence that could be > > fun to trace through more thoroughly. > > > > > > but if you were one thing one might > > > >> notice from looking at todays chart is that the Sun, Jupiter, Mercury > >> and Venus are close together > >> > > > > How often does that happen? Mercury and Sun -- all the time. Sun and > > Jupiter OR Venus once a year. Sun Jupiter AND Venus -- I can't calculate > > mentally. But the point is -- what happened the last 10-50 times this > > conjunction occurred? The same thing as in this cycle? If not, if little > > correlation, then it seems to me the conjunction is of little consequence. > > > > It also a conjunction that is occurring on an full moon. BTW, I am > looking at this more astronomically or geophysically than > astrologically. I think that outside of the Sun and Moon influences the > other planets do not have much physical impact on us or the planet. In > fact I think the ancients really just used the planets to keep track of > naturally occurring cycles be they economic, political and particularly > agricultural. However if you look into celestial mechanics and play > with the basic calculations you will find you have to add in aberrations > which are created by whatever gravitational forces other planets create > be they small. Otherwise the orbits won't be correct. What dates need > t the most refined terms? The ones when conjunctions such as these occur. > > and the Moon of course about to go full. > > > >> That means there is a lot of extra gravitational influence than normal. > >> Full and new moons often cause earthquakes because the gravitational > >> force causes the plates to rise and when they settle you get a quake. > >> > > > > Interesting speculation. However, we have 12 new and 12 full moons every > > year and hardly have 12 8.8 earthquakes every year. And if we do look at > > major earth quakes, did they (most) always occur at full or new moods? > > > > > > The person that brought this to public attention was Jim Berkland, a > geologist for Alameda county who predicted the Loma Prieta quake and got > fired as a result. Later Russian scientists released a study showing > that indeed the new and full moon and the tides they create impact the > probability of quakes.
That would be interesting to look at. I have seen similar correlations with sunspot activity. Increasing the probability, not necessary causing the event each and every time,is an important perspective. Eating a pound of butter a day may never cause a heart attack, But it does increase the chances. And for a population, more butter gorgers will have heart attacks. > However a fault must be ready to go for it to > create a quake. So we can't always sure there is going to be one but > there is high probability. Also quakes often occur near eclipses which > as you know are less frequent per year. Keep in mind that such forces > can make the earth bulge as much as 3 feet which may not sound like much > but enough to cause some shifts in plates. > > > >> One observer mentioned that we might be in a cycle of quakes for the > >> Pacific Rim that began with the Indonesian one a few years back. Look > >> for even more quakes following the new moon. > >> > >> As much as some folks might like to believe that a bunch of people > >> hopping on foam could prevent things like this, > >> > > > > >
