posted July 22, 2016 10:07 PM            

There is no such thing as 'progressed composite' for reasons I have outlined before. Regardless of the fact that some astrologers use such charts they are fictitious because there is no singular set of original planetary positions to progress by natural coordinated movement of the planets. There are only made up ways of moving them forward (averaging, arbitrary degree/year). In progressions, we let nature's natural movements of the planets together determine how they progress. In other words, such progressions of a composite have no basis in nature or physics.

posted July 23, 2016 01:58 AM            

quote:

---

In progressions, we let nature's natural movements of the planets together determine how they progress.

---

posted July 23, 2016 05:47 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by mir:
Nature's natural movement is seen in the progressed composite as this chart is [b]made out of 2 personal progressed charts. Just as a regular Composite is made out of 2 natal charts. We can see in it how each one's progressed planets relate to the other's. There's a miraculous phase resonance found in a certain set of planets with both people during a progressed composite conj or opp. But well, what am I doing here? Just elaborating on the geometry behind the basics of a composite? We all should know what's underneath that. Denying the progressed composite is denying what can be seen in it + the basics of any composite and a solar system with its entire basis in nature: planet phases, unfortunately a too neglected subject in astro world. [/B]

---

You said it better than I could have.

Progressed composite calculations are consistent with natal composite calculations, as both are using a set of midpoints between chart, irrespective of planetary movement (in a natal chart planets rarely have the same speed of motion either).

I do see however that if you reject the theory of midpoints and composites in general, THEN the idea of progressed composites has to be rejected, too.

However if we use natal composites AND progressions, there is no reason why we wouldn`t use progressed composites, as their calculation uses the same method as natal composites (just with progressed charts).

posted July 23, 2016 10:03 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by StelliumH6:
I have read in so many Lindaland posts that the progression and transits to relationship charts mark changes, can be positive or more challenging to move through. How about this one?
Composite chart with Venus/Mars conjunct True Node in 8H

---

posted July 23, 2016 11:11 AM            

What you are describing is the study of charts with some fancy descriptive words. The study of astrology tracks what is actually happening in the sky. Without that there is no astrology.

We don't just get to make it up.

This describes the state of modern astrology perfectly. The study has shifted from observing the actual movements of the sky to an inaccurate 2D representation of it in which its all just symbolism anyway, and anyone can come up an idea about how it works.

If you don't see it first illustrated in the sky it is fiction.

posted July 23, 2016 04:06 PM            

There's no way on these grounds to dismiss the progressed composite if one accepts the validity of;

a) the regular composite
b) progressions in general

posted July 23, 2016 07:02 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by StelliumH6:
ll~ My original question was based on our Progressed Composite chart on astro.com. Venus and Mars are conjunct and both of those planets are conjunct True Node. The aspects are occurring in the 8th house. Not sure if I am breaking it down properly. I use very basic terms.

---