posted October 02, 2009 08:28 PM            

i haven't done it yet

i'm on my phone and i don't have a computer. i found 2nd of september 1989 but that need to be double checked. no time yet.

posted October 03, 2009 05:05 AM            

take care lovely

posted October 04, 2009 12:26 AM            

After calculating the moon to the exact sign and degree of my birth ASC I was surprised to find that my moon sign at the time of birth was the Ascendant at the time of conception! crazy!!

Calculated moon to be 22.45 Aqua on Tue 23 August 1983 at 8:32am.. The rising sign at that time was 6.51 libra but my moon sign is 18.16 libra .. still close though!

The conception chart has strong aspects much like my birth chart *sigh* lol

Oooooooops I just realised that I calculated wrongly! I adjusted so that my birth Moon (18.16 Libra) = the ASC at time of Concep.

Even then I calculated it to be 9:03am Tue 23 August 1983 (instead of 8:32am that same day)... the Moon at that time was 23.01 Aquarius ... my birth ASC is 22.45 Aqua.

That's even more precise! Wow ..

Here's the chart and the aspects...

Very revealing .. I have a kite. Hmmm Merc opposing Saturn makes a lot of sense actually.
Also I am surprised that there are no hard/strong aspects between either Saturn OR Venus or even Jupiter, yet in my natal I have Saturn opposing Venus and Venus trine Jupiter and Jupiter sextile Saturn all at 12 degrees of their respective signs.

C. Sun conj. Venus in my natal 7th explains a lot! Always thought it was weird I didn'thave any 7th house planets yet expend a lot of energy into my relationships .. I always just put it down to the Libra moon

posted October 04, 2009 05:56 AM            

I haven`t had the time to delve into this myself yet.

But I thought you might be interested.

(Personally the last sentence I found a bit condescending to be honest)

http://www.angelfire.com/sd/binah/method.html

http://www.angelfire.com/sd/binah/chartrules.html
http://www.angelfire.com/sd/binah/browning.html (I just love that couple!)
http://www.angelfire.com/sd/binah/newmanwoodward.html

posted October 04, 2009 12:58 PM            

I think it is a mathematical - astronomical operation, which reflects the relation between the movement of Moon and ASC.
So, everyone doing it will come up with a conception chart which contains Moon in the same sign as their natal ASC is.
It is not a miracle, it is mathematics.

The question is, is it astrologically relevant?
I could imagine that it is. After all astrology IS dealing with the relations bewteen times and places and the movement of certain objects.

But I don`t think this conception chart necessarily is the actual conception chart. It may rather be symbolical or astrological. And as such the calculated ASC may be symbolical as well, just reflecting this relationship between Moon and ASC.

Now I just wonder which ASC is more fitting? the natural actual one or the calculated rectified one?

There is this question: when does life start?
You know astrologically the exact time of birth is the moment babies breathe on their own for the first time.

Now that first breath could be already inside the womb or it could be a bit later than the cutting of the umbilical cord even. Some need a bit "pushing" to breathe.

So the birthtime that is written on the birthcertificate might not be completely correct for many reasons:
- the nurse wasn`t reliable (but in Germany they are told to really note the exact moment)
- the clock in the room may have not been completely accurate
- they noted the time the baby`s head was being seen, or the time the doctor cut the umbilical cord, or the moment of the first cry (which usually follows the first breath, but not always)

Would the rectified ASC be more correct astrologically? Symbolically?

I don`t know. But it is an interesting question.

Luckily there usually is not much time between the two ASC-degrees.

Well, to be honest I must say the 7 degree Sag still feels more appropriate for me though.

posted October 04, 2009 05:35 PM            

i just wanted to say, about the place of conception, yes i think it would matter, definitely. in my ca e, it's pretty easy, in other, may be Not.

and about the relevance of the conception chart, i think individuals are born in an environment, and their parents are "chosen" for the baby or vice-versa so a chart for the time of conception still fit the individual "to be" because, why the parents decided to conceive at that time, their circumstances at that time would be part of the history of the individual. i would think it would determine the individual as well

posted October 04, 2009 09:26 PM            

quote:

---

Now I just wonder which ASC is more fitting? the natural actual one or the calculated rectified one?

---

I wondered that too. My rectified ASC, MC, and Vertex are all 6-9º after my natural ones. So I studied transits & solar arcs with both angle sets, and the natural chart was significantly more accurate.

Before that comparison, I was already leaning towards my natural ASC because I identified far more with that Sabian. But I'm still on the fence about Sabians , so I needed more evidence to work with.

quote:

---

It is not a miracle, it is mathematics.

---

Is math not miraculous?

The formula is pure mathematics, but if that formula matches up with reality - if that was indeed the day of conception - I'm amazed. If accurate, it would mean that our moment of birth (within a couple of hours) is fated from the moment of our conception. Wouldn't it? It must have already been proven to be generally inaccurate, or I would expect it to have already been big news by now.

In my case at least, that conception day makes a lot of sense. It was on a Saturday and my parents' wedding anniversary was within a few days. Plus, it being St. Paddy's Day would've provided the necessary booze. How fitting a child conceived with the aid of liquor would be born with a Sun-Neptune conjunction.

posted October 04, 2009 09:41 PM            

his AC is 29' capricorn

I know he was conceived between the 31st october and 4th november 2000