Constellations and the Zodiac

As kids(pre-teens) we use to lay on our backs on Revere beach,and look
at the clouds going by and each of us describing different patterns in
the clouds.Not many clouds were so distinctive that we all agreed on the
same image. I think this relates well with
constellations.. Reality is I could not pick out
leo,Scorpius,Taurus or many others. The last time I saw the big and
little dippers was on my back on top of Look Out Mountain near Denver.
I read in this spacetime 88 constellations are recognized by the Western
world,and best we keep in mind,not all civilizations see the same
objects. Still we have to give great credit for those even in ancient
times for making a map of the sky,and that is my main thought in making
this post. Star mapping is not easy. Looking up at the stars on my back
makes me very dizzy. Now lets go with the origin of the Zodiac. It
goes like this we looking out as the Earth orbits the Sun, The sun's
path projected onto our skies traces a line of view known as the
"ecliptic" and this passes through 12 constellations that together
comprise the 'zodiac" Interesting these 12 constellations were noted by
Asians,Greeks Chinese etc.and naturally gave them different names With
Asian they used religious characters surrounded by the 12 signs of the
zodiac. Well all this begs the question Who are the sky
mappers of today.? Has the great eye of the hubble with its great
cameras make mapping easier today? Bert

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" schreef in bericht
...
Now lets go with the origin of the Zodiac. It
goes like this we looking out as the Earth orbits the Sun, The sun's
path projected onto our skies traces a line of view known as the
"ecliptic" and this passes through 12 constellations that together

Actually it's 13. Ophiuchus the Serpent Bearer is also there...

Also: It used to be that when you're born in the sign of, say Leo, the sun
would rise in that sign. Because the earth is wobbeling, the sun rises a
sign or two later (or sooner... I forgot).
Does this mean you have to read your own horoscope or that of those two
signs diffirence?

S.

Stephan wrote:

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" schreef in bericht
...
Now lets go with the origin of the Zodiac. It
goes like this we looking out as the Earth orbits the Sun, The sun's
path projected onto our skies traces a line of view known as the
"ecliptic" and this passes through 12 constellations that together

Actually it's 13. Ophiuchus the Serpent Bearer is also there...

True, but be careful to distinguish "constellations" from "signs".
There are twelve of the latter in popular astrology, each comprising
exactly thirty degrees of the ecliptic, so they're not at all the
same as the constellations recognized by astronomers.

Also: It used to be that when you're born in the sign of, say Leo, the sun
would rise in that sign. Because the earth is wobbeling, the sun rises a
sign or two later (or sooner... I forgot).

Only about one *sign* (see above) -- but as far as the
*constellations* are concerned it depends on exactly what part of the
ecliptic you're in, as they vary greatly in longitudinal extent. The
"first point of Aries" is currently located near the western edge of
Pisces, so the equinox comes about one sign (or month) earlier than
the Sun's arrival in Aries. See below.

The rising sign or ascendant has nothing to do with the natal or sun
sign; the latter is determined by the longitude of the Sun, not its
altitude or local hour-angle.

Does this mean you have to read your own horoscope or that of those two
signs diffirence?

Most astrologers (of those who even consider such matters) justify
the "tropical" zodiac by its alignment with the seasons, considering
the 'slippage' due to precession as irrelevant and treating the
constellations' association with the signs as symbolic only. OTOH
there are "sidereal" astrologers who use a zodiac that's synchronized
with the celestial sphere rather than the Sun. They still have the
problem of how to align the constellations, with their arbitrary
boundaries and varying extents; one of their systems defines the
longitude of Aldebaran (Alpha Tauri) as 45°, putting it in the middle
of Taurus (and Antares very near the middle of Scorpio), according to
which the vernal equinox is currently at about 335.2° sidereal longitude.

--
Odysseus

Odysseus wrote:
Stephan wrote:

"G=3DEMC^2 Glazier" schreef in bericht
...
Now lets go with the origin of the Zodiac. It
goes like this we looking out as the Earth orbits the Sun, The sun's
path projected onto our skies traces a line of view known as the
"ecliptic" and this passes through 12 constellations that together

Actually it's 13. Ophiuchus the Serpent Bearer is also there...

True, but be careful to distinguish "constellations" from "signs".
There are twelve of the latter in popular astrology, each comprising
exactly thirty degrees of the ecliptic, so they're not at all the
same as the constellations recognized by astronomers.

Also: It used to be that when you're born in the sign of, say Leo, the =
sun
would rise in that sign. Because the earth is wobbeling, the sun rises a
sign or two later (or sooner... I forgot).

Only about one *sign* (see above) -- but as far as the
*constellations* are concerned it depends on exactly what part of the
ecliptic you're in, as they vary greatly in longitudinal extent. The
"first point of Aries" is currently located near the western edge of
Pisces, so the equinox comes about one sign (or month) earlier than
the Sun's arrival in Aries. See below.

The rising sign or ascendant has nothing to do with the natal or sun
sign; the latter is determined by the longitude of the Sun, not its
altitude or local hour-angle.

Does this mean you have to read your own horoscope or that of those two
signs diffirence?

Most astrologers (of those who even consider such matters) justify
the "tropical" zodiac by its alignment with the seasons, considering
the 'slippage' due to precession as irrelevant and treating the
constellations' association with the signs as symbolic only. OTOH
there are "sidereal" astrologers who use a zodiac that's synchronized
with the celestial sphere rather than the Sun. They still have the
problem of how to align the constellations, with their arbitrary
boundaries and varying extents; one of their systems defines the
longitude of Aldebaran (Alpha Tauri) as 45=B0, putting it in the middle
of Taurus (and Antares very near the middle of Scorpio), according to
which the vernal equinox is currently at about 335.2=B0 sidereal longitud=
e=2E

--
Odysseus


The precession of the vernal equinox has been known since ancient
times. That is the reason for the phrase "Dawning of the age of
Aquarius." So I can't see why there would be an alignment problem
unless it is due to the shear ignorance of the modern crop of
astrologers, something I wouldn't put past them!

Double-A

"Double-A" wrote in message
oups.com...

The precession of the vernal equinox has been known since ancient
times. That is the reason for the phrase "Dawning of the age of
Aquarius."

Ancient Times???

That song's not that old.


So I can't see why there would be an alignment problem
unless it is due to the shear ignorance of the modern crop of
astrologers, something I wouldn't put past them!

Double-A

John Zinni wrote:
"Double-A" wrote in message
oups.com...

The precession of the vernal equinox has been known since ancient
times. That is the reason for the phrase "Dawning of the age of
Aquarius."

Ancient Times???

That song's not that old.


Today's teenagers might consider it to be.

Double-A

(G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote in
:

As kids(pre-teens) we use to lay on our backs on Revere beach,and look
at the clouds going by and each of us describing different patterns in
the clouds.Not many clouds were so distinctive that we all agreed on the
same image. I think this relates well with
constellations.. Reality is I could not pick out
leo,Scorpius,Taurus or many others. The last time I saw the big and
little dippers was on my back on top of Look Out Mountain near Denver.

Scorpius is pretty hard to miss. It is one that is definitely reminiscent
of the creature it's named after.

I read in this spacetime 88 constellations are recognized by the Western
world,and best we keep in mind,not all civilizations see the same
objects.

The 88 constellations are actually specified by the IAU. This is an
international organisation. Not just Western world.

http://www.iau.org/

Still we have to give great credit for those even in ancient
times for making a map of the sky,and that is my main thought in making
this post. Star mapping is not easy. Looking up at the stars on my back
makes me very dizzy.

Stay sober. You wont get so dizzy.

Now lets go with the origin of the Zodiac. It
goes like this we looking out as the Earth orbits the Sun, The sun's
path projected onto our skies traces a line of view known as the
"ecliptic" and this passes through 12 constellations that together
comprise the 'zodiac" Interesting these 12 constellations were noted by
Asians,Greeks Chinese etc.and naturally gave them different names With
Asian they used religious characters surrounded by the 12 signs of the
zodiac.

The "signs" are not the same thing as constellations.


Well all this begs the question Who are the sky
mappers of today.? Has the great eye of the hubble with its great
cameras make mapping easier today? Bert

Sloan digital Sky Survey:

http://www.sdss.org/

Also you'd have to give an honourable mention to the US Navy:

http://ad.usno.navy.mil/star/


Klazmon.

In Hawaii it's a Fish Hook!


--

The Lone Sidewalk Astronomer of Rosamond
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Astronomy Net Online Gift Shop
http://www.cafepress.com/astronomy_net



"Llanzlan Klazmon" wrote in message
7.6...
(G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote in
:

..

Scorpius is pretty hard to miss. It is one that is definitely reminiscent
of the creature it's named after.


The 88 constellations are actually specified by the IAU. This is an
international organisation. Not just Western world.

http://www.iau.org/
Stay sober. You wont get so dizzy.

"Starlord" wrote in news:XKWdnQcKuPlEgJ3eRVn-
:

In Hawaii it's a Fish Hook!



That makes sense too! (I assume you were talking about Scorpius). I
personally see Sagitarius as a teapot. Even has the steam billowing from the
spout ;-).

Klazmon.

Hi klazman Thanks for the information you added to my post. I don't
believe in astrology,but still I'm glad I'm Aquarius Had to drive up
Lookout mountain,and climb the last 500 feet to its peak. Even through
looking down is Coors brewery I climb mountains only when sober. Don't
drive after having 3 Buds. Don't get drunk just get mellow. When I sign
Beert I'm mellow,and that mellow kicks in after 2pm.
Reality is beer foam is relative to the foam structure present the
moment before the big bang. Einstien read tea leaves,I read beer foam.
Its all a matter of taste. Bert