The Astrology Handbook : Two Guides From Beginner To Advanced

Solar Arcs: Astrology's Most Successful Predictive System Including Midpoints, Tertiary Progressions, Rectification, the 100-Year "Guick-Glance" Ephemeris and 1,1

<MAP NAME="boxmap-p6"><AREA SHAPE="RECT" COORDS="1, 140, 83, 150" HREF="http://rcm.amazon.com/e/cm/privacy-policy.html?o=1" ><AREA COORDS="0,0,10000,10000" HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/redirect-home/planetshowcase" ></MAP><img src="http://rcm-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/rcm/120x150.gif" width="120" height="150" border="0" usemap="#boxmap-p6" alt="Shop at Amazon.com">

Solar Arcs: Astrology's Most Successful Predictive System Including Midpoints, Tertiary Progressions, Rectification, the 100-Year "Guick-Glance" Ephemeris and 1,1
by Noel Tyl

Dell Horoscope Magazine, February 2002
Solar Arcs is an absolute "must buy" for anyone interested in Tyl's methodology.

About the Author
Noel Tyl is one of the foremost astrologers in the world. His 20 textbooks have guided astrologers for two generations, and his lecture activities throughout 16 countries often draw standing-room-only audiences. Tyl has written the professional manual in the field, the 1,000-page Synthesis & Counseling in Astrology; he is consulted regularly by individuals and corporations throughout the world; and he directs the Master's Degree Correspondence Course for Certification of professional astrologers from his office in the Phoenix, Arizona, area.

Excerpted from Solar Arcs : Astrology's Most Successful Predictive System Including Midpoints, Tertiary Progressions, Rectification, the 100-Year 'Guick-Glance' ephe by Noel Tyl. Copyright © 2001. Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
1Timing the Circle

The Development of Solar Arc Theory The Circle. How does this shape, this spatial form, enter consciousness; how does it take on meaning; how does it come to be divided into 360 units; and how is it used as a measurement standard to capture the time of our lives? Initially, man must have learned to identify the circle from the pupils of maternal eyes, and then from reading the eyes of others. Above, overseeing all, there were the moving disks of the godly Sun and the Moon. There were the intricate centers of so many flowers. Even when worked by a stick into the sand or earth, the circle had uniqueness among forms: with a cross, there was the sense of division (the beginning of the concept of 2); but with the fashioning of a circle, there was the sense of unity, of wholeness, of inviolable symmetry. We can speculate that, in development, man then began to grasp the concept of magnitude: there were different sizes of trees, rocks, animals, squares, and circles. Thought-tools were developed to express the relationships between things in terms of size, to capture comparisons and set standards. (This phase of evolution is often cited as the dawn of mathematics.) With the development of language, thoughts became communication. The sense of possession-what defines you and what defines me-was linked with the relativity of magnitude. Counting systems and measurements were then required to describe things accurately, to define location and property, to plan building. And through continuous long-time measurement experimentation, rules emerged-certain measurement practices and relationships that were always valid. The square was understood: all sides were equal! Then, the observation that a square divided by a line drawn diagonally between opposite corners yielded two identical triangles led to understanding triangles; then to the rectangle and other polygons (configured by squares and triangles, a geometry accomplished through subdivision and rearrangement), but with the circle, rules were harder to discover. The observations about the circle that must have been dominant are, first, that there is no beginning or end to the circle (the concept of constant development, of eternal continuity) and, second, that the wider the circle is, the longer the distance is around it (the concept of containment, of boundary).1 Mathematician-engineer Petr Beckmann gives us an extremely clear suggestion of the development of the properties of the circle, as shown on page 3. So we find a fairly flat patch of wet sand along the Nile, drive in a stake, attach a piece of rope to it by loop and knot, tie the other end to another stake with a sharp point, and keeping the rope taut, we draw a circle in the sand. We pull out the central stake, leaving a hole O (see drawing below). Now we take a longer piece of rope, choose any point A on the circle and stretch the rope from A across the hole O until it intersects the circle at B. We mark the length AB on the rope (with charcoal); this is the diameter of the circle and our unit of length. Now we take the rope and lay it into the circular groove (inscribed) in the sand, starting at A. The charcoal mark is at C; we have laid off the diameter along the circumference once. Then we lay it off a second time from C to D, and a third time from D to E, so that the diameter goes into the circumference three (plus a little bit) times.2 We discover that the circumference of the circle (the distance around its boundary) is equal to 3 times the diameter, plus a little bit. Experimentation shows that this is always the case no matter what the diameter of the circle is. This coefficient (characteristic relationship) is called a constant, and for the circle it is labeled Pi, shown by the Greek letter .3 Research shows that, some 5,000 years ago, the coefficient of the circle was known in these close terms, in terms accurate enough to allow reliable measurement of the circle: the circumference of a circle was determined by 3+ times the diameter (C=Pi D or, more customarily, C=2 Pi r, where r is the radius, one-half the diameter of the circle).4 The Egyptians and Babylonians pursed the “” that little bit over 3, the distance EA in the drawing on page 3. We presume that they tried to define EA in terms of the diameter AB, as a fractional part of that key unit distance. If we mark EA on a rope and lay it off as many times as it will go on (into) the diameter distance AB of any circle, it will go down between 7 and 8 times, i.e., EA is something between 1/7 (0.142857) and 1/8 (0.125) of the unit distance AB. The modern study of Pi does not get much closer; the decimals never end. The basic standard coefficient now used is 3.14159265 (i.e., 3 + .1416). Learning to calculate the area of a circle (the space within the circumference) was another problem, a complex one indeed. Determining the area of a square was easy: subdividing the space bounded by the perimeter gave us a measurement of the space in terms of one side multiplied by the other side, a x b (see diagram, p. 5). With two units per side (2 feet, for example), we get an area of 4 square feet. When the square is increased to a rectangle (oblong), the same rule applies: 3 units on one side and 2 units on the other side gives us an area of six “quare”units. When we subdivide a rectangle or square by a diagonal, we get two triangles, i.e., the area of the triangle in this case is measured as one-half the product of the...(Continues)

making money on the internet	making money on the internet	making money online	make money online	make money online
make money online	making money on the internet	make money online	making money on the internet	making money on the internet
Internet Casino Gambling	Lawyer Directory	TheLIG	10OffPages	Baby Sleep Problems
Baby Gender Selection	Dog Obedience Training	House Training a Dog	Multiple Streams Of Income	pet rabbit care
save my marriage	speed reading course	starting a day care center	increase my bench press	beat the speeding ticket
sugar addiction	sciatica treatment	home remedy for heartburn	snoring remedy	natural cancer cure
acne home remedy	bad breath cure	arthritis pain relief	irritable bowel syndrome treatment	asthma cure
negative calorie diet

astrology