|
Author
|
Topic: "No correlation between lunar longitudes"
|
Aquacheeka
Knowflake Posts: 2219
From: Toronto
Registered: Mar 2012
|
posted January 23, 2013 09:53 AM
  
I find the results of this study from Didier Castille's Sunny Day For A Wedding to be fascinating: http://www.aureas.org/rams/castille02us.pdf . The sample size, at 6.4 million, is too large to be ignored in my opinion. The study proves unequivocally that astrology influences whom people marry. When they adjust for population differences (with Taurus being the most represented sign in France and Scorpio the least-represented), marital results remains constant (gender is taken into account however, with women being listed vertically and men horizontally on this chart). They find statistically significant results for marriages by sun sign (again, with the gender mattering), Mercury sign, and Venus sign, but not with the moon sign, even when they accounted for moon signs changing during a particular day by doing the following: quote:
These tests were exactly modelled on the previous tests. But the Moon is fast and changes sign every 2
or 3 days. For the entire population (both women and men), a huge percentage of them (44%) were born
on a day when the Moon changed signs, i.e., it was in a given sign at 0:00 a.m. and in the following sign
less than 24 hours later.
This difficulty was accounted for in a partial way. Because the exact time of birth was not recorded in the
files, people born on a day when the Moon changed sign were distributed in both signs in exact
proportion to the relative number of hours the Moon was in each sign that day. For example, if on a given
day, the Moon transited from Aries to Taurus at 8:00 a.m., people born that day were distributed one
third in the class « Moon in Aries » and two thirds in the class « Moon in Taurus » since the Moon was
in Aries for one third of the day and in Taurus for two thirds.
So why do you think this might be? Is it possible that since our moon sign is about self-nurture and so deeply personal, we don't really require our spouses to appeal to this part of ourselves? Do we as people look more to our spouses to be compatible with us in a social sense (Venus), agree with our ideas (Mercury), and quite simply, to feed our egos?
IP: Logged |
mockingbird
Knowflake Posts: 1045
From:
Registered: Dec 2011
|
posted January 23, 2013 11:41 AM
Perhaps it has something to do with societal expectations regarding marriage.I'm not going to write the novella I have in my head b/c I'm on my phone, but the TL;DR version is: People tend to get married before the flutter of initial love diminishes / before familial-familiar love takes root (whether rather than or in addition to).
Perhaps that's why Moon Sign compatibility's not as strongly influential.
I say "as strongly influential", because it's not clear if the study compared Moon/Moon compatibility, Moon/Sun compatibility, Lunar contacts in synastry throughout the chart, etc. ------------------
If I've included this sig, it's because I'm posting from a mobile device.
Please excuse all outrageous typos and confusing auto-corrects. IP: Logged |
Aquacheeka
Knowflake Posts: 2219
From: Toronto
Registered: Mar 2012
|
posted January 23, 2013 05:33 PM
Thanks, mockingbird. That's a really interesting perspective that I hadn't considered. So it takes years and years to really know someone on that level to get to the moon... fascinating.IP: Logged |
Aquacheeka
Knowflake Posts: 2219
From: Toronto
Registered: Mar 2012
|
posted February 01, 2013 10:55 AM
Kinda sucks that Aquarius women only get three compatible sun-sign matches while signs like Libra get five.I guess it takes a certain kind of man to marry us. IP: Logged | |
Lindaland
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
