The Grand Plan or Astrological Ages and the First Point of Aries

Whoever has drawn a horoscope or for that matter been navigating at sea the old school way using a nautical almanac, has at one point early on had to learn about the point in the sky called the First Point of Aries [FPA]. The FPA is the position of the Sun as it crosses the celestial equator at Spring Equinox, which nowadays rests on 20th March. The diagonally opposing point is called the First Point of Libra and is found 180° East of the FPA, and marks the point of the Autumn Equinox, the other point in the Zodiac where the ecliptic crosses the celestial equator.


For the bigger picture, clickie clickie

The FPA defines the coordinate system on the celestial sphere. The «origo» of the celestial map if you like, where all the ends meet, giving the Sun the position 0° Right Ascension (or «Longitude») and 0° declination (or «Latitude») just as the Sun (and the ecliptic) crosses the celestial equator at Vernal Equinox.

Now, that’s all sorted out, until you realise that the damned thing is moving, because of an odd thing called ‘axial precession’ or ‘Precession of the Equinox’ to sound a bit more archaic— The FPA moves very slowly westwards (or «backwards» in the Zodiac) at a circus pace of merely 1 arc degree every 72 years, or 30° in roughly 2 160 years (full turn in about 26 000 years). Today the Northern Pole Star is Polaris, but in 11 000 BC it was Vega. The celestial North Pole «orbits» the constellation Draco, the Dragon:



However, the constellation of Pisces physically takes up much more space than the other constellations, or about three hours (45° or 1/8th) of the ecliptic (the Sun’s apparent path against the backdrop of stars), taking up nearly twice the space in the sky as its neighbours do, its astrological house (which is the one used to determine its astrological age) is only given 1/12th or 30° of the Zodiac, where the 12 signs or houses are assigned 30° each.



Thus, even though the FPA is nowadays nearly 30° into the constellation Pisces measured between its physical boundaries, the entry into the Age of Pisces was marked by the fall of the Roman Republic and the following rise of the Roman Empire. Remember the old mantra: «As Above—So Below». So within this century is gone the Earth will enter the next astrological age—the Age of Aquarius. We can but speculate on what this new age will bring, but in astrology Aquarius is connected to technology and peace, so we can always hope this will be the age when the World takes to its senses. Wouldn't come too soon.


ETA: I Just realised this thread is my 101st, and its subject is directly related to the first. Nice!

This Age of Aquarius has interested me for a long time. I've read that some people believe that we have already entered it. While some believe not yet. With the advancements in technology now, it wouldn't surprise me if we were already there. I think we are lucky to be born in these times. I'm excited for what the future holds. Always stay positive!

Do you think that we have entered the age or not yet?

a reply to: ValentinoG

The common thumb rule is that between year 2000 and 2100 AD Earth will enter the Age of Aquarius. There is a transitional period of roughly 144 years if we use the Pythagorean numbers. In about 60 years we are in the middle of this transition, but if you are the optimist kind rather dreaming ahead instead of having to look back and coping with the present, well, you might say we are already making our first steps into this new age of promise and hope.

However the rough numbers used in the OP, are based on the «Pythagorean» system of 1° precession every 72 years, 30° in 2160 years and 360° in 25 920 years, there are other ways to count these astrological ages. Some use the 973 year cycle of Jupiter-Saturn «Greatest Conjunctions». See www.abovetopsecret.com... for more. Using this system, Earth entered the Age of Aquarius in 1940.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Too bad all this "universal awakening" New Age of Aquarius stuff only applies to Earth; for planets such as Mars do not share Earth's polar inclination in space, nor its vernal points.

Greetings- Along the same lines.. Do You ever look at Your horoscope in the newspaper? Do You know that there is a HIGH likelihood that that horoscope is incorrect? In the newspaper I am listed as a 'Gemini' (31 May) but in actuality I am a 'Taurus' ...

With knowing also the time of birth, research 'Ayurvedic Astrology' There are numerous FREE readouts online and they'll also provide a view of the constellations when You were born, "yes" even if born in the morn...

namaste

a reply to: swanne

No, but there is no colony left on Mars or Venus. Those planets got toasted ages ago. We are talking about a certain God who sports around the Universe with a Huge Box, the thing I call the Cubus Christi or the Kabaregidapot, otherwise known as 'New Jerusalem', or 'Bride of the Lamb':

==> www.abovetopsecret.com...

If we get to play with this thing when God plans to arrive in about 1000 years, we can launch ships out to space from «a fixed point in zero gravity» possibly using some kind of sling shot mechanism and all sorts of other simple mechanical ramps. And it will allow space travellers to re-acclimatise from living in low to zero gravity over a long period of time, by gradually rebuilding muscles by moving up or down within the levels of the structure with gravity ranging from zero gravity in the upper levels to 1 at ground zero, the surface of the Earth. It will also allow us to correct the orbits and whereabouts of our nearest neighbours in space. Let's say we shrunk the number of days in a year on Earth into exactly 360 days, and then we could adjust Venus' orbit into 222 Earth days giving a near perfect 'morning-star cycle' of 582 days. Then we could adjust the orbit of Mars to use exactly 777 days round the Sun. Just for the Hell of it. I bet God would dig

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

No, but there is no colony left on Mars or Venus.

Give it 50 years.

It will also allow us to correct the orbits and whereabouts of our nearest neighbours in space. Let's say we shrunk the number of days in a year on Earth into exactly 360 days, and then we could adjust Venus' orbit into 222 Earth days giving a near perfect morningstar cycle of 582 days. Then we could adjust the orbit of Mars to use exactly 777 days round the Sun. Just for the Hell of it. I bet God would dig.

The planets have an associated kinetic energy and inertia. Do you know how much energy would be needed to slow down a 5.36 zetta-Tons planet moving at the average velocity of 78,341 miles per hour?

a reply to: swanne

It's all a matter of balance. Given you had a fixed point in space (which you will virtually have with the Huge Box), you could balance the planet to make it agile, and then you could direct it anywhere you'd like to have it. Given of course that this is real. But as far as I see it should work in theory. It would be lovely to see someone actually looking into the physics involved with the Huge Box and the gravity involved and such a thing as as 'gravitational equilibrium' or 'gravitational inertia' (in lack of better terms) involved with the Box and the axis mundi or axial precession and how in principle a child could push a mountain over on the side with a single poke if we had the mountain balanced on a pivot or change that into the Earth balanced against the Huge Box which in turn is aligned against the ecliptic plane and the Sun. You could tango the Earth like a big blue señorita. The same can be done with other planets against the ecliptic exactly because of things like the stored kinetic energy in these huge rocks and snowballs racing through "empty" space 'round our star. But I agree, what looks neat and fine on the paper often has an unpredictable cousin irl. Better not play God, I suppose it's quite fine as it is. But it would be damn cool.

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
It's all a matter of balance. Given you had a fixed point in space (which you will virtualy have with the Huge Box), you could balance the planet to make it agile, and then you could direct it anywhere you'd like to have it.

The Huge Box would not act as a fixed pivot point, it would just wheeze along with Earth as it speeds around the Sun.

The same can be done with whole planets against the eccliptic

But the ecliptic is not an actual physical rail, it is just an imaginary line. It certainly does not provide pivot point. Planets are on orbit not because they "rest on the ecliptic", but actually because of their mere speed and mass. More mass, and the planet would spiral down to the sun. More speed and the planet would fly into the depths of space. This is why objects such as Pluto or asteroids don't even follow the ecliptic - an orbiting body needs only a barycenter (usually it's the Sun) and a correct speed.

originally posted by: swanne

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
It's all a matter of balance. Given you had a fixed point in space (which you will virtualy have with the Huge Box), you could balance the planet to make it agile, and then you could direct it anywhere you'd like to have it.

The Huge Box would not act as a pivot point, it would just wheeze along with Earth as it speeds around the Sun.

The same can be done with whole planets against the eccliptic

But the ecliptic is not an actual physical rail, it is just an imaginary line. It certainly does not provide pivot point. Planets are on orbit not because they "rest on the ecliptic", but actually because of their mere speed and mass. More mass, and the planet would spiral down to the sun. More speed and the planet would fly into the depths of space. This is why objects such as Pluto or asteroids don't even follow the ecliptic - as long as there is a barycenter (the Sun) & correct speed, the asteroids will go on an orbit.

Much can be said about the ecliptic and why most galaxies and solar systems all seem to have a horizontal plane or an ecliptic making them disc-shaped. Within the boundaries of this disc the rules are different and more predictable than on the outside. It is sort of a cosmic echo of the geometry of the higher dimensional complex, as we can see the contours of a harmonial 4D echo of 10D hyperspace. Things like Up and Down actually exists in space, both on quark or superstring level and in the cosmic or astronomical multiversal reality of the All. Which is probably just a spark or an echo of yet a higher and even more complex reality.

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

Much can be said about the ecliptic and why most galaxies and solar systems all seem to have a horizontal plane or an ecliptic making them disc-shaped.

a reply to: swanne

Well those nebulae or giant plasma clouds there, are hardly galaxies or solar systems, anyway, if you look at enough of those you will start to see a pattern of how even these clouds of dust and gases and plasma and what not-- often balance themselves out over time, becoming more and more symmetrical, order comes out of the chaos once again. Like with the Oort cloud in your gif, there is clear evidence of a disc-shaped belt or equatorial plane even here.

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
Like with the Oort cloud in your gif, there is a clear evidence of a disc-shaped belt or horizontal plane even here

And do you see a fixed pivot point somewhere in there?

Me neither.

a reply to: swanne

The Huge Box has gravitational properties that can be used to manipulate the whereabouts of the Earth and stuff like axial incline and for that matter you could use the Box as a stumbling block in a controlled high precision collision with the Earth. We could align the Box and the Earth in all sorts of different ways and due to shear size and astronomical mass, manipulate the Earth's orbit, spin, axis, length of the day and plenty other things. In theory, if we managed to get the Moon manoeuvrable using some sort of absurd future super ridiculous technology, we could probably use the moon for the same purpose. For all I know the Cubus is just the Moon, cut into a brick.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Well scientifically, the mere presence of the Box would add mass to Earth, slowing it down. To change the axial tilt, the Box would have to be slightly off the poles - the rotation would induce a force for the heavy box's location to reach the equator. The lenght of day would augment, too, since the new weight would add resistance to the Earth's rotation.

But why would we want to change axial tilt/year lenght/day lenght, anyway?? They are just fine as they are now.

a reply to: swanne

Just for the Hell of it, or simply because God said so 2000 years ago or something? I don't know what God has in mind other than that as far as I can see this thing must be some kind of ultimate emergency shelter or a final Ark for Earth's life as the planet as such at that point is possibly already ruined. A sort of life support system on a global, and astronomical scale. As far as I can see this Huge Box will most likely be anchored along the equator and put the Earth in tidal lock with the Sun without tipping the axis mundi, where the Huge Box and half of the planet will remain on the "far side" in eternal night, probably along with plenty ice, while the side facing Helios will be quite hot and hellish indeed-- if this turns out to be the setting for the establishment of a new heaven and the new Earth or our future home(s) in space. Mars anyone? Io? Some distant starsystem?

To get back to the subject in the OP, I'd like to mention Hipparchus, an ancient, but brilliant Greek astronomer and mathematician, who has been credited with the discovery of [axial] precession:

en.wikipedia.org...

Hipparchus of Nicaea (/hɪˈpɑrkəs/; Greek: Ἵππαρχος, Hipparkhos; c. 190 – c. 120 BCE), was a Greek astronomer, geographer, and mathematician of the Hellenistic period. He is considered the founder of trigonometry[1] but is most famous for his incidental discovery of precession of the equinoxes.[2]
[…]
Hipparchus is generally recognized as discoverer of the precession of the equinoxes in 127 BCE.[32] (However see Aristarchus of Samos#Precession for evidence that this phenomenon was known earlier.) His two books on precession, On the Displacement of the Solsticial and Equinoctial Points and On the Length of the Year, are both mentioned in the Almagest of Claudius Ptolemy. According to Ptolemy, Hipparchus measured the longitude of Spica and Regulus and other bright stars. Comparing his measurements with data from his predecessors, Timocharis and Aristillus, he concluded that Spica had moved 2° relative to the autumnal equinox. He also compared the lengths of the tropical year (the time it takes the Sun to return to an equinox) and the sidereal year (the time it takes the Sun to return to a fixed star), and found a slight discrepancy. Hipparchus concluded that the equinoxes were moving ("precessing") through the zodiac, and that the rate of precession was not less than 1° in a century.

One could argue that trigonometry must have been known much earlier and demonstrated to excellence by the builders of the Great Pyramid, and the Cross-Staff is an ancient trigonometry tool that has been in use for thousands of years in one of many shapes. But his discovery of axial precession, and the difference between the sidereal and tropical years-- through good old critical research presented in 127 BC seems genuine. Though it must have been known earlier, he was the one to let the cat out of the bag by proving it through observation and measurement and sound scientific method. Jolly good.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

You've just reminded me of a strange thing that happened recently. I live in the UK, and we're forever (EVERY DARN DAY) getting menus for different takeaway restaurants through our doors. They use all sorts of clip art and graphics programs to create these menus, and usually the quality is either incredibly poor or incredibly good.

Around six months ago I got one through for a seemingly ordinary takeaway, but I was totally baffled by the choice of clip art. It was a low-quality menu for a likely low-quality restaurant; however, there was a surprisingly phenomenal representation of the likely sight (from somewhere between our Moon and the Earth) of the Earth as it orbits the Sun, with the 'New Jerusalem' cube sitting aloft its Northern hemisphere. The graphic was exceptional, with swirls of galaxy as backdrop, and the diamond point of the Sun cresting the horizon, with the cube partially visible as luminescent and casting a semi-shadow. I remember doing a double-take, and thinking 'Nah', before dumping it. A few weeks later I received the same menu once more, and filed it away somewhere. We've never had one through the door since.

The idea of the New Jerusalem has always troubled me, and being an actual Christian myself, I still haven't rectified the transcendent God I know (through subjective experience) to exist, with the apparently universe-locked Hypercube. Literally the thought just occurred that perhaps it's maintained by advanced proto-humans/'angels', and provides a physical point of anchorage through which other dimensions of reality can be accessed? You've got me thinking now, seriously, nicely done!

FITO.

a reply to: JimNasium

I made an illustration of the zodiac showing the twelve astrological houses with their respective dates (inner circle), compared to the actual area covered by (or the time the Sun spends in) the constellations in the sky (outer circle). I used the data shown on www.ast.cam.ac.uk... I have no idea who they are or what they might be promoting, but the text seems legit enough



As you'd probably notice right away the "physical" constellations are rotated almost 30° aligning the astrological houses about one sign ahead of the actual constellations in the sky.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

If you ever find it filed away somewhere, snap a photo and post it here on ATS. I believe it will be built by humans and robots in orbit. I see it as the ultimate Ark (i.e. emergency shelter) made for the lit. salvation of humanity and terrestrial life. It will also function as a spaceport and interstellar truck-stop and restitution centre