posted June 26, 2016 07:48 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lucia23:
--then there's no deterrent or discouragement for people to decide, based on the conjunctions between asteroids Union and Desperate, that the Pisces they met online who slept with them once and hasn't called, or the Virgo colleague who asked them to please leave him alone, is really their Twin and he's just running away because he's scared about the karmic depths of their connection (versus running away because he's scared because they're a loony stalker.)

I agree with Ceridwen--would value the study more without the labels, and if labels are going to be used, there needs to be concensus about what a Twin Flame is, and an agreed-upon definition.

---

posted June 26, 2016 07:57 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceridwen:
Funny enough, I once ran my parent`s chart through one of these Vedic matchmaking calculators (yes I know they are just as reliable as wester astrology online calculators. :laughing

Well, the calculator was advising strongly against that marriage (because of them only having 11 points out of 36 and my Mom being Manglik, plus they got 00 points in the area "Love" So much for calculators!)

---

posted June 26, 2016 10:01 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lucia23:
My suspicion---although it would be really fascinating to test this hypothesis by looking at, say, 100,000 couples where both parties are in a mutual marital/cohabiting relationship and self-identify as each other's "twin flames", and then a control group of 100,000 totally random charts of people who haven't met----and you would of course have to exclude couples in an arranged marriage who used an astrologer from the self-identified twin flame group-----is that synastries and composites can map trends in the energy of the relationship with some accuracy, but can't be used as the whole picture.

Dynamics in each natal chart, and dynamics in each person's life that I suspect might not be mappable by astrology at all, also play a big role. I suspect that mathematically and statistically, every human on earth has a lot of exact asteroid conjunctions with a lot of strangers they will never meet, and also with people who might not want a relationship with them, and a lot of probably-inaccurate rationalization is required to make it all check out.

I think synastry and composites are useful as tools for looking at possibilities, symbolic energies, areas of harmony or challenge----they aren't complete nonsense---but I am very skeptical that they can be accurately used as tools to predict that any two people are twin flames. skeptical, but interested and excited to learn more/hear research findings.

i just think that statistically, based on the probability of an aspect in the composite and the number of people on earth, you'd probably get a lot of false positives.

Twin Flames who find each other in this lifetime are supposed to be incredibly rare and incredibly highly evolved---I suspect a lot of the self-declared Twin Flames who found each other might just be ordinary people who are in romantic partnerships with people they love, and it feels good to them to believe that the connection is special and fated. But it would still be exciting if, say, 97% of the couples in the sample of 100,000 self-declared Twin Flames Who Found Each Other couples had an exact conjunction between asteroid TwooWuvForever and asteroid Karma in their synastries, and 4% of the control group of random strangers had that conjunction.

My suspicion would be that if you did the large-scale statistical research with a proper control group, there would be some trends differentiating people in actual relationships (60% of the real couples with exact planet-angle conjunctions, for example, versus 35% of the control group).....but nothing like exact, consistent markers.

The astrologers here are excellent---but I'm very skeptical about the hypotheses.

---

This is my feeling on the subject also.

Additionally, I believe loving is a learned skill, that all can learn to do at a high level.

My intuition is that all charts lead to the same place, just in different ways.

Compatibility is finding someone whose stage of development compliments yours in some way, I feel.

posted June 26, 2016 01:28 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Voix_de_la_Mer:
This is my feeling on the subject also.

Additionally, I believe loving is a learned skill, that all can learn to do at a high level.

My intuition is that all charts lead to the same place, just in different ways.

Compatibility is finding someone whose stage of development compliments yours in some way, I feel.

Discernment and semantics aside, I am always interested in robust research that may inspire people, so I will watch with interest.

---

Yes! Compatibility is finding someone whose stage of development compliments yours in some way!

Exactly... that's why progressions work so well, and why we look for compatible charts which complement and challenge one another in huge or subtle ways rather than one-size-fits-all synastry interpretations which do not acknowledge the nuance in individual charts...

And when we idealize a twin flame relationship as being only ever kind and sweet and dripping with kindness it sort of does a disservice to the complexity of our unique experiences...

They say you can only treat your twin as you would treat yourself... and that's why you could never treat them terribly... but aren't so many of us seriously hard on ourselves?

I'm hoping someone will help me understand. I know there are so many perspectives on this subject.

It seems to me that it is a true kindness and truly loving to be deeply in love and committed to somebody whose darkness you have seen way too clearly... who has shown you their vulnerability, their humanness... and for whom you are still going to be there.

I can see why the thought developed that twin flames who find their flame and create a solid relationship are near the culmination of their development... if we are looking at soul growth in a linear way... I think that would be because to be truly at peace with your TF and able to have a loving embodied relationship with them you also need to be truly at peace with yourself and in love with yourself. Given they are you and all (so the story goes )

So the culmination of our development is marked by the ability to see ourselves in another and to love that being.

Seems in keeping with many spiritual traditions except that the 'other' is sometimes synonymous with the friend (Rumi), or Krishna (everybody)...

It seems to me that when the descendant and the ascendant are not separate anymore... when we've bridged the gap between self and other, when we can travel seamlessly along that axis... that is when we'd begin to truly merge.

If i were to guess, I'd think that this axis would be important in connections where the line is blurred between who's me and who's you... whether we are even different people...

posted June 26, 2016 01:34 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aubyanne:

Q: What would make this different?

A: The opposite approach is being taken with compiling the United Twin Flame Astrological Database. I have received accurate, complete birthdata from several twin flame couples -- who are 'in Union' -- married, or otherwise cohabiting in a committed relationship, where they both identify as the other's twin flame, and are very public about their role. We will derive our potential markers, signatures, and configurations from these natals, synastries, and composites, rather then employing the old method.

---

Okay so, you will be sharing with us the birth data from these self identifying TF couples so that we can study them and share what we find, right? I look forward to taking an in-depth look at them.

posted June 26, 2016 01:47 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vixen:
This reminded me two threads I've bumped into... asteroids 111111 and 131313 were discussed there (with you doubting them being twinflame/soulmate asteroids - I'm genuinely curious what these asteroids mean to you! ). In one of these threads I found GemBird talking about 101010 actually being the twinflame asteroid. And as much as I don't believe in single astrological twinflame marker, I think 101010 would be VERY interesting to look up in twinflame (or even soulmate) synastries and composites.

---

Hey there, Vixen!

Not seen anything hit regarding the repeating numerical asteroids -- either 101010, 111111, or 131313.

posted June 26, 2016 01:50 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by LeeLoo2014:
Welcome back, Auby!

Glad to see the patterns included here

---

Thanks, Lee! I've missed you guys!

I think it's going to come down to patterns; I honestly do. I don't think we're going to see a predominance of 'this conjunct that' or even repeating degrees. I think we're going to see echoing patterns across the astrology, which will probably have its own unique flavour.

Once we grow a sufficient database, we may start noticing similarities between certain ways the 'journeys' played out for the couple, and if that's reflecting in -- say, the Davison. I'm really curious about that.

Like, are the more intense and dramatic couples more Fire / Water? The more methodical and practical ones Earth and Air? Vice-versa, do we see more easy aspects or hard? Are there any particular patterns that repeat?

posted June 26, 2016 02:29 PM            

Maybe you'll find patterns that prove my Twin was my Twin after all.

Current testing indicates he is not. I'm mentally paging him for a second opinion.

Kidding sort of.

posted June 26, 2016 02:58 PM            

quote:

---

They say you can only treat your twin as you would treat yourself... and that's why you could never treat them terribly... but aren't so many of us seriously hard on ourselves?

I'm hoping someone will help me understand. I know there are so many perspectives on this subject.

---

I saw a video by the Twin Flame healers where they talk about this:

posted June 26, 2016 03:26 PM            

Because who would go to Twin Flame specialists unless they wanted to be convinced the person they want or love is their Twin Flame? So convenient that there's no such thing as a false twin..

posted June 26, 2016 03:41 PM            

For instance my current partner and I have lots of repeating aspects from chart to chart... double whammies, strange coincidences, same aspects being made from composite-natal for each of us, just in different ways, etc.. So that the relationship seems strangely similar on some levels for both of us. Like Davison Mars opposes his Venus exactly and composite Mars opposes my Venus exactly, strange stuff like that. Or he'll make an aspect to my chart and then receives the same aspect he gives me from a composite planet...

But I'm sure that the number of synchronicities and strange repetitions between us isn't so unusual statistically, it's just that I've been looking very deeply and findings lots of similarities when doing various kinds of chart comparisons.

My most recent discovery was davison Chiron quadrinovile his South Node and davison South Node quadrinovile his Chiron... OK that's not multiple charts... or really a repeating pattern.. but still caught my attention...

posted June 26, 2016 04:25 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceridwen:
... I am sceptical of so called "proved twinflame relationships". This would need an actual definition of what a twinflame relationship is. And that definition does not exist.

---

You are right to be sceptical, Ceri. The truth is, astrology is either being misused in the TFC, (twin flame community) with a lot of our old, and disproven research finally hitting them, and, when it comes to the actual astrologers, we've all got a rather foul taste in our mouths from the last go 'round. But all I've ever wanted is a solid control group from which to work, even as I knew it'd require me to do some serious digging. When I found myself IN the community, I suddenly had access to things I hadn't before.

It's now allowed me to see that, yes, while the theories regarding ORIGIN of twin flames does vary -- and a bit wildly, in some cases -- we DO have a solid definition of what a 'twin flame relationship' is, as it stands defined by the community.

The TFC, for the record, is, at present, around several thousand people. OF that group, less than 5% are in actual twin flame relationships. While I would count myself among them, it's not personally sufficient for my research. For example, my own boyfriend still gets hung up on the origins and definitions, for which he has a lot of contempt. I've recently left the 'heart' of the community, being that I don't fit their rather dogmatic definition of a twin flame relationship.

And so, while it does vary, for the purpose of the research, I'm abiding by ONLY the following to define a twin flame relationship:

1) Married or otherwise cohabiting in a committed relationship.

To the community, this is known as 'Union', and while it DOES vary, that's pretty solid by most standards. In fact, it's THE 'gold standard'. Starting out, I'm ONLY including data from those who fit that qualification.

2) Actively identifying as twin flames to the public and within the community.

In simpler terms, it means that A has publicly stated 'B is my twin flame'. I especially prefer the ones who blog and vlog about it, very 'Brangelina' in their twin flame 'identity', often engaged in charitable work and / or conducting 'coaching' businesses for other self-identified twin flames to 'get into Union'. I'm not sure who started the trend, exactly, but everyone has been following suit.

So, if nothing else, I'm interested if we can put a bow on the 'twin flame astrology' subject by identifying patterns specifically within this community.

As far as I'M concerned, they're the only ones I'm considering 'twin flames'. NOT because it's in terms of true legitimacy, but because the definition IS otherwise impossible to determine, categorically. There are too many little 'factions' and a few competing views.

In fact, I'm one of the loudest rebels in the community, at present. Yep, li'l ol' me.

But, really, what'd they expect with a 3H MOON-URANUS and SUN-PLUTO-BML?

I'd love to limit everything to Unions 5+ years or more, but right now my qualifications are only those outlined above. We'll see.

posted June 26, 2016 04:35 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orange:
Great, but

I hope the researchers are not going to tailor the "twin flame discoveries" by their own synastries and composites,validating their partners as twin flames, or something exclusive like that, in the way it happened with the last "research".

---

Very good concern, Orange. I'm going to be quite judicious in my selection of those whom qualify for the database. If any astrologers wish to also submit their data, they MUST fit the qualifications -- no exceptions.

For the record, I don't consider myself in this population. While we are in the twin flame community, and have identified as such a few times, we don't really resonate with the community in general; we don't know what is going on -- just that it's something we cannot explain without employing paranormal or anomalous 'causes' or origins. Certain features of the twin flame journey apply enough to where various members of the community have adopted us into it. We're just exploring together. Our first and foremost commitment is to each other, with the soul connexion, karma, and what it all 'means' being secondary.

I'd say we're an outlier at best, and I don't want to confound the data with outliers. Not starting out. I want a solid control group, and I need it to consist of VERY easily definable, COMPLETELY objective criteria. No wiggle-room.

Believe me, Orange, I'm NOT going off of twin flames who SAY they're in Union. I get dates of commitment ceremony, or their wedding or engagement, AND I talk to both parties. If BOTH have not 'presented' themselves to the community via recording 'our story' or 'coaching' videos, then I get a confirmation from BOTH that they identify as each other's twin flame.

posted June 26, 2016 05:07 PM            

you are voicing my reservations. Though I donīt think that all or even the majority of them is doing this (some will just be very convinced of their beliefs, no matter how much founded in reality or not), it`s difficult to discern.

Well I still would prefer a research on lasting loving happy couples honestly, with or withoiut the tf-badge.

posted June 26, 2016 05:08 PM            

sounds sound enough to me, your approach.

Personally I just am very wary of communities like this, but I am pretty sure you know why.

posted June 26, 2016 05:54 PM            

He has Sun conjunct Jupiter
I am Sun in sag....

Inversed nodes conjunct same houses. Me leo nn 7th, he leo sn 1st

I Am fire, he is water
Our charts following each other holes

28 and 18 birthdays

Just some little.details

posted June 26, 2016 06:34 PM            

About the only thing I would expect to see would be a strong Neptune (or similar influence) in the natals.

But I have an infant-to-toddler knowledge of astrology (at best), and I believe twin flames are a silly concept (although I do believe in soul mates and soul families, more or less). So what do I know?

posted June 26, 2016 07:04 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceridwen:
It doesn`t matter if two people are labelled as twinflames, soulmates, karmamates or earthmates, as long as they love and respect each other, and share their lives as partners with a lot of support, too, and by doing so accidentally also influence their environment in a positive way by their example (just by being, not because they actually set out to lecture anyone)

---

posted June 26, 2016 07:12 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lucia23:
For people who are using astrology for reasons connected to this-worldly, this-lifetime sex, romance, and ego---rather than as part of an advanced spiritual practice and a non-ego-driven study of connectedness and karma---these technologies are misleading.

---

posted June 26, 2016 07:17 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lucia23:
I think you should also use comparative groups ...

---

Not a bad idea, Lucia, except that there's no relationship between those comparative groups. I'd like to at least start out with trying to evaluate whatever patterns we MAY find in this extremely small (yes, as to be statistically insignificant) sample size, before branching out into testing the potential validity OF those patterns.

I think we're a long ways off of from being able to say 'we found X and Y in enough confirmed twin flame couples to conclude that X and Y are a valid marker'. Even if that's the ideal destination.