text:
Message Board
. Please
Sep 26, 2020, 07:58 AM
Return to website
School of Evolutionary Astrology Message Board
Evolutionary Astrology Q&A
JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ...
Go Down
« previous
next »
Topic: JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ... (Read 228801 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Most Active Member
Posts: 554
Re: JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ...
Reply #135 on:
May 03, 2013, 01:43 PM »
Hi Rad, and group
I'm sorry I'm late with the Mercury analysis of Darwin. There's simply too much in this symbol I've been trying to understand. Been taking notes these two weeks on different aspects of this Mercury, and now I am taking longer than expected in putting this together, because at same time having other insights and noticing other stuff I still need to understand more clearly. Not sure if will be able to have this written down before next week. I'll try to get it done today, otherwise it will probably be ready by monday or tuesday.
Kristin, I hope you are getting much better as soon as possible.
God Bless, love, Gonzalo
Last Edit: May 03, 2013, 10:33 PM by Gonzalo
Very Active Member
Posts: 426
Re: JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ...
Reply #136 on:
May 03, 2013, 08:46 PM »
Hi Rad,
This is such a valuable opportunity you are providing us all, to learn and grow, and I appreciate it greatly, as I'm sure everyone else does too. So thank you
... and I can relate to what Gonzalo is talking about - with all the interwoven and repeating themes, it can take quite a while getting it all down on paper. But really worthwhile doing though.
blessings Upasika
Last Edit: May 04, 2013, 01:17 AM by Upasika
Most Active Member
Posts: 9652
Re: JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ...
Reply #137 on:
May 04, 2013, 08:01 AM »
Hi Upasika and Gonzalo,
Wolf intended in this Planetary Method to in fact help the EA person see and understand the repeating themes/ archetypes in the birth chart. And even though going through in a very methodical / Virgo like way this planetary method does just that. And, yes, it can be very tedious in a way yet at the same time helps many organize the birth chart in a necessary way that allows the core dynamics/ archetypes to be understood. So even though we start with the core EA paradigm which symbolizes the core of the Soul's evolution from life to life by way of understanding the core archetypes that reflect that the addition of the planetary method then allows an adding on in an organized way of the other core/ repeating archetypes that, in combination, creates a total picture of the Soul.
And, Gonzalo, just try to focus on the core archetypes within the totality of the vastness of Darwin's 3rd House, his Mercury signature within this. Not every little detail needs to be developed: just the core archetypes presented/ understood in the organized way that the planetary method promotes.
God Bless, Rad
Active Member
Posts: 163
Re: JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ...
Reply #138 on:
May 04, 2013, 10:50 AM »
Hi Rad and Group
Some observations about Darwin's Mercury:
Within the Soul's purpose of knowing Reality and Sun's purpose of a revolution in values Mercury ruling the PPP suggests that the way of thinking and communicating is crucial to the evolutionary intention.
Within it the Soul intended to develop plasticity and creativity in thought; seeking a thought divergent from established reasoning, able to dissolve the barriers to opening new orientations.
PPP is in 9th house ruled by Mercury, which is ruled by Neptune in Sag; the soul's evolutionary intention was ordering and organizing his thoughts in a philosophical way aligned with Natural Law and cosmic knowledge.
"Philosophy . . . is the discipline that consists in
concepts" (Gilles Deleuze). Darwin's Mercury was focused on observing natural phenomena in order to find the underlying causes (conjunct Pluto, trine Uranus in Scorpio) and to communicate them by creating new concepts as Natural Selection, the very innovative concept he introduced. Creating concepts is actually a Jupiter function, especially in his case with Jupiter NP conjunct Pluto, but being in balsamic conjunction there is an interrelation that goes in complementary directions; then these new concepts become the foundation of a new intellectual framework (Mercury) while observation and data collecting has also the function of verifying and communicating in order to change collective thought.
Mercury in Pisces in 3rd house balsamic conjunct Pluto is the instrument used by the evolutionary need to look in the empirical world for information concerning Ultimate reality and to express it in linear thinking with its inherent capacity to penetrate to the bottom line of any intellectual process. The Soul observes, interprets and expresses empirical phenomena with sight on the ultimate sense, and then analyzes it in order to discover the natural law behind them.(PPP in Virgo in 9th house, Mercury trine Uranus and NN in 11th house Scorpio, Neptune in Sag in 12th house balsamic Saturn).
Although Darwin's realizations were based in his capacity to learning from others and synthesize information from many fields of knowledge, the Source that was the alpha is also the omega that attracts the Soul's search for whole truth as well as the need to organize thoughts in a way that makes possible others to understand.
Communicating to the world what the Soul had known and discovered in prior lifetimes synthesized with contemporary discovering is a central theme, purpose of Mercury and Pluto in 3rd house. The creative purpose of a linear thought aligned with the Source has now attained a productive point and the Soul is able to fulfill its social role communicating it and initiating a shift in the scientific paradigm. (Mercury LQP sextile SN)
Paradigm shift, I believe, has to be discussed in Jupiter's analysis.
With Mercury in Pisces linear (?) thinking is creative, metaphorical and abductive.
The Tree of Life - only illustration in
The Origin of Species
, a picture of a family tree or descent, also called phylogeny - reflects that. With it Darwin sought to explain a new concept in science: how various species of biology fit together to explain the origins and evolution of species. Instead of a static and hierarchical ladder as a metaphor for understanding the cluster pattern of biodiversity, Darwin pictured a tree, dynamic, not linear and with many elements that spread out in different directions.
It is an analogy of how his Mercury put things together.
Eagerly exploring different environments with curiosity, seeking variety and diversity, collecting and describing a vast number of specimens, he came to see species in a different way. Darwin did not focus on the sameness of individuals; rather, he thought it was important that individuals vary in spite of the fact that they belong to the same species, realizing that the variations could become the raw material for evolutionary change. (Mercury in 3rd house conjunct Pluto trine NN in Scorpio in 11th house)
He had the courage to think different, to put data together in a different way, assuming "The task . . . [of] not so much . . . see what no one yet has seen, but to think what nobody yet has thought about that which everyone sees." (Schopenhauer) (Mercury in Pisces in 3rd house trine Uranus in 11th house in Scorpio).
Putting data together in a new way allowed introducing the initiation of a paradigm shift in the collective consciousness (Mercury trine Uranus conjunct NN in 11th house in Scorpio)
Hovering atttention
Pisces allows the mind, even the left brain's hemisphere, to observe in a sort of "evenly suspended attention" or "evenly hovering attention" as Freud named it, which "consists simply in not directing one's notice to anything in particular and in maintaining the same 'evenly-suspended attention' in the face of all. . ." that one sees.
"It remains an essential rule invariably to leave out of account the ostensible continuity . . ." It is necessary give no a priori importance to any aspect of the observation suspending the cultural, paradigmatic motives which usually direct his attention ". . . and give himself over completely to his 'unconscious memory'" (Mercury trine Uranus).
Giving equal attention to all that is seen allows to not lose the least clue even it seems illogical or irrelevant; in consequence attention must remain diffuse, not focused, not directed by a previous intentionality. It's paradoxical; the mind is directed without anything particular to attend, concentrating in all at the same time, which means some dispersion. That's how Darwin would think.
Even relying on the evolution of its knowledge, (Mercury balsamic to Jupiter and Pluto, Mercury balsamic Vesta in 4th house, balsamic SN Pallas in 3rd house Pisces), the mind lets go of all prior knowledge (collective above all) and remains
and open to the new. (Jupiter NP Pluto, Mercury FQP square Saturn conj Neptune, novile SN Mercury conjunct NN Mercury in Pisces, NP conjunct Sophia, Metis and SN Sophia)
In Chinese culture availability is in the beginning of savior's behavior, is previous to all virtues. Keeping all in equality allows to have access to the undifferentiated bottom of the Tao, from which emerge all differences and thus the savior can perceive and accept the less difference when it appears without reducing it or let it pass.
The soul's intellectual origins gave it a solid thought built by means of a fixed concentrated focus that made possible what JWG called the Scorpio "eagle's eye" now expanded with a hovering attention.
SN Mercury in Cap in 2nd house (conjunct SN Saturn, Pluto and Vesta) reflects that the soul had internalized a linear thinking structured according the consensual scientific paradigm and its conceptual boundaries. Reasoning had a much centered focus and was determined by time and space reality.
In the last lifetimes the soul began changing this approach as reflected in SN ruler Venus in Aries in 3rd house, ruled by Mars square Mercury's SN and inconjunct NN and Uranus in Scorpio (the eagle's eye).
However, as we have already discussed here, the Soul faced opposition and persecutions because of that.
Now Mercury NP novile its SN reflects that the Soul is in a gestation process of finding new perceptions and intellectual forms in his search for Truth and that the individual is ready to dare the new, overcoming old frustrations and facing threats to his security, aware of the karmic and evolutionary entire process and of what he must do to create the new reality that actualizes the evolutionary intent. (Mercury FQP trine NN conjunct Uranus)
This process was possible by means of an interrelation between left and right brain hemispheres. Indeed Mercury is balsamic Jupiter, sharing a stellium in the same sign and house, picking up in a common origin (SN in the same sign), Mercury's NN is in Jupiter's traditional sign and NN Jupiter is in 29.43 Gemini conjunct NN Vesta. Looking at the chart, Pluto between both suggests the Soul positioned in the
corpus callosum
, and this is a crucial piece of the evolutionary purpose and the whole evolution of the Soul.
Thanks so much Rad for this opportunity
God Bless
Most Active Member
Posts: 1402
Re: JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ...
Reply #139 on:
May 04, 2013, 10:39 PM »
Darwin's Mercury
The Soul's core intention in past lives was to develop mental powers and intellectual abilities to logically order its existence so that it could philosophically understand the fundamental truths behind the diversity of phenomenal reality. The evolutionary intention was to synthesize a vast array of information and ideas (Mercury) that had served as an empirical way of organizing its reality over many lifetimes, synthesize conflicting truths and the ideas that they created, liberate from obsolete material of a consensus nature, establish and make real his own intellectual structure, develop his own unique language structure that would convey the limited amount of total truth inductively sensed, and communicate that understanding to the world in order to benefit the collective of Souls.
With no retrograde planets, Uranus ruling the 3rd house, and a North Node in the 11th house conjunct Uranus, the Soul was poised and ready to culminate information that had been collected and stored as memories in order to liberate it from consensus thinking patterns, and reveal revolutionary timeless information, internally realized, that would have an evolutionary effect upon the Soul and a cataclysmic effect upon the world (Mercury ruled by Neptune Sagittarius 12th).
The mutable archetype is very strong in the chart with 5 mutable planets (Mercury, Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune, Pluto) in 2 mutable houses (3rd and 12th). The Mercury signature – Mercury Pisces 3rd – correlates to mutability, adaptability, flexibility and ingenuity. Mercury is logical, rational, curious, nervous, finely tuned, communicative, ever changing and ever learning; in the sign of Pisces a natural psychological purity, imaginative, divinely inspired, mystical, impressionistic, sensitive, receptive, deep thinker, and able to pick up on subtleties that others cannot; in the 1st decan of Pisces double-emphasis on mystical and psychic; in the 3rd house an ability to absorb information and knowledge inductively much like a sponge absorbing a river of information.
Inductive thought correlates to Pisces and Jupiter and deductive thought to Virgo and Mercury. Mercury in the intercepted 3rd house, Mercury conjunct Pluto, Mercury ruled by Neptune, Mercury ruling the 9th house, Mercury ruling the PPP, Uranus ruling the 3rd house, and Uranus and Neptune being heavily aspected indicates these archetypes were thoroughly developed prior to the current life. The repeating themes attributed to the substantial quantity of the mutable archetype indicates the Soul had already learned how to intellectually understand reality, verity and truth.
With Mercury ruled by Neptune, a culmination of old ideas was taking place through a process of disillusionment and discarding of untruths (scientific, psychological and religious) so that more of the whole truth could be revealed. With ruler of 3rd house, Uranus in Scorpio conjunct the North Node, the past life obsessive collection of facts and data reflected a "time has come" in the current life for highly accelerated evolution. Layers of repeating messages stored as memories would suddenly bring penetrating insights to life, thereby evolving the Soul. With Venus ruling the 11th house (and SN) much of the past life information needed to re-manifest in order that the Soul could actually liberate from it: reformulating the past in the face of the past (Pluto ruling North Node).
The crisis in action generated by Mercury-Pluto (3rd) square Saturn-Neptune (12th) caused the Soul to come up against the brick wall of others' opinions, ideas or philosophies as his weak boundaries were tested. To push through the square he needed to go beyond the structure, boundaries and form of Saturn which had generated individual/collective patterns of guilt, fear and confusion crystallized in his thought patterns. Through these stressful confrontations (internal and external) came the realization that any idea not internally comprehended was not truly known or understood by him. Therefore the conflict with others was necessary so that Darwin's new perspectives, his own knowledge of his own opinions, could emerge. Whatever part of his intellectual system that was internally realized by him (not borrowed from others) was then able to be established in the world (PPP) through the unique language structure that he had developed.
Darwin's revolutionary work served to awaken the unconscious memories through a stream of insight and revelation (Mercury trine Uranus). The mind could easily discard unwanted information, liberate and de-condition from limited structural consensus dynamics/perspectives. This colossal amount of accelerated evolution would radically change the structure of the Soul forever (Uranus conj North Node) ensuring movement through the 3rd stage Individuated and into Spiritual. Through the action of the trine, Darwin's thought processes occurred more spontaneously, intuitively, and were less the result of premeditated thought. This allowed a natural sifting of plausible information from unsubstantiated ideas. However, as a natural scientist, Darwin had an innate capacity to understand the details of anything independent of subjective interpretation. This capacity allowed his scientific efforts to be validated through observation and correlation.
With Uranus (higher octave of Mercury) trine Pluto, Darwin persistently tried to find the bottom-line taking him deeper and deeper into the layers of the individuated unconscious. Pondering upon the nature of things was carried forward into the current life, the repetitive nature of messages (or information) correlating to Uranus. In this way a natural process took place: collection – selection – revelation – fruition. Evolution usually proceeded in an easy and steady manner, however with a considerable amount of "fixed" energies operating, the only way past the resistive structures of the Soul was to generate shock and trauma that would act as a release mechanism of obsolete elements.
With Mercury's balsamic conjunction with Pluto, the Soul is completing an entire evolutionary cycle. It carries an impulse to transcend and dissolve all the knowledge and information that had come before in preparation for the new cycle. However, the conjunction at an orb of 4 degrees meant there were still loose ends to be tied and the evolutionary purpose to be fulfilled. Herein lies the answer to Why this Mercury? Darwin's Mercury would become the vehicle by which the timeless would be consciously sensed through his thoughts and perceptions, thus igniting new perspectives that would have the effect of opening our eyes to the reality of our world. Rigorously tested and validated evidence included in his masterpiece would change our world forever.
Most Active Member
Posts: 9652
Re: JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ...
Reply #140 on:
May 05, 2013, 08:00 AM »
Hi Mirta,
Thanks for making the effort you have to do the EA of why Darwin chose to have his Mercury in the house and sign that he did relative to the entire paradigm of his Mercury, 3rd House, and polarity point of Pluto's signature. You have done an excellent job capturing the very essence of this why in a very succinct way defined by a solid EA reasoning. In essence you have understood that at once his mind was defined by a inductive process of natural reasoning relative to his observations that then allowed, via the 'eagle's eye', to focus on the particular but only as it relates to the whole of the design that is the essence of this inductive process.
Excellent job Mirta. This is how EA is meant to be done and, because of this, you are helping others understand EA itself.
God Bless, Rad
Last Edit: May 05, 2013, 08:09 AM by Rad
Most Active Member
Posts: 9652
Re: JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ...
Reply #141 on:
May 05, 2013, 08:13 AM »
Hi Linda,
Thanks for taking the time that you have to explain the why and how of Darwin's mind, of how and why the totality of the Mercury archetype manifested in his life. Your EA reasoning for the succinct and profoundly accurate understanding of his Mercury function, in total, is simply excellent EA work. This is how EA is meant to be done and, because of that, you are helping others understand what EA is, and how it is meant to be applied in life.
God Bless, Rad
Most Active Member
Posts: 554
Re: JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ...
Reply #142 on:
May 05, 2013, 10:01 PM »
Hi Rad
ok, and thanks for the direction, but this then means to start anew, since I was I was going into some detailed past-lives chapters of Darwin's Mercury, which have been quite revealing to me. I'll try to apply your indication and write a more synthesized way, and not to take too long. Sorry for the delay.
God Bless, Gonzalo
Active Member
Posts: 130
Re: JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ...
Reply #143 on:
May 06, 2013, 01:02 AM »
Hello Rad and Group,
I have had some personal difficulties making enough time to do the type of research and thought in the manner in which I hoped concerning Mercury and Darwin (I can relate to Gonzalo's comments only in my ideals, not so much in actual time put in!), but thought I should post what I have at this point since most people have posted. Rad, thank you for this piece on Mercury- it is so fascinating to me, and very helpful on a personal level as I have a Scorpio Uranus trine a Pisces Mercury in my chart and I feel a whole new level of thought has opened up for me concerning this thanks to this work. Here goes:
Charles Darwin was born with a Pisces Mercury in his third house, correlating with the need of his consciousness to give order to the phenomenal nature of reality and to organize in his mind the many connections he could observe and study in the world that lead to an ultimate understanding of creation itself. Darwin had a deep soul connection to this quest for understanding, as he was born with a balsamic conjunction of Mercury with Ceres and Pluto in his third house. Moreover, the ruler of his Mercury is a Sagitarius Neptune that is in his 12th House that has Saturn in balsamic conjunction to it, and the ruler of his Neptune is a Pisces Jupiter that is also in his third house. Darwin's personality in this incarnation would have to sense the heavy weight of so much soul history wrapped up in pursuit of this ultimate understanding- these birth signatures are just too intense to indicate anything less than an obsessive soul desire his personality would feel incapable of stopping from pursuing additional knowledge and finding avenues and channels of communication to express it through.
When we consider the house rulerships, we see that Aquarius rules his third house, connecting it with his Aquarian Sun soul purpose to help throw off societal conditioning of the past and help him objectify the nature of reality outside the judgements and crystallized perception of the status quo and consensus authorities such as religious authorities. Being Aquarius, his third house cusp is thus ruled by his Scorpio Uranus in his 11th House that is conjunct the North Node of his Moon, making this desire to organize the phenomenal nature of reality incredibly deep and probing in a way that is willing to move beyond intellectual taboos and limitations of thought, and making this desire to transform the consensus perception and understanding of phenomenal reality a part of his own deep evolutionary soul work. The mental function of organizing information and knowledge regarding the nature of phenomenal reality is deep soul work for Darwin this lifetime- especially since Aquarius is on the cusp of the third house, and his soul purpose is reflected in his Aquarius Sun in his second house, and that the ruler of his third house cusp is Scorpio Uranus conjunct his North Node. This is somewhat challenging and pushes him out of his comfort zone of past beliefs and organizational structuring of phenomenal reality, a lot of which was conditioned as we can see by him having a Capricorn Moon in the second house that is also conjunct the South Node of his Mercury. With Pisces Jupiter being the ruler of his Mercury ruler Neptune, and being in the third house, he is meant to stretch and expand the foundation and basis of the way he is mentally organizing information concerning the ultimate nature of phenomenal reality, developing more of an inductive approach rooted in metaphors and conceptual understanding. Although still relying on a deductive and linear approach, as seen in his Mercury being in his third house, since he was born with Mercury in Pisces, it also brings in the challenge of him integrating a more conceptual inductive approach into his detailed, linearly framed research process. This call to synthesize deductive and inductive approaches in his research is a central conflict in his soul's incarnation as Charles Darwin. This can further be seen through the North Node of his Mercury being conjunct his Natal Pisces Mercury in his third house.
In contrast, with the South Node of his Mercury being conjunct his Capricorn Moon in his second house, there is a strong crystallization of thought inherent in his Mercury perception even though he is meant to liberate from it and expand his conceptual framework this lifetime. Indeed, these past life perceptual patterns can be felt in every moment of his Capricorn Moon's constant response to his environment- as we have spoken about, however, with Pisces Mercury balsamic conjunct Pluto, which rules a Scorpio Uranus that is conjunct the North Node of his Moon, ultimately Darwin is meant to shatter the crystallized form of these past life Mercury functions. The inherent conflict this brings up in his human form and perceptual patterns is intense however, even more so since Taurus rules his 6th House, meaning that his Aries Venus that is at the very end of his third house is not only the ruler of his South Node of the Moon, but also correlates with how his intellect rationalizes and analyzes aspects of phenomenal reality. Aries Venus being at the very end of his third house, conjunct his IC and fourth house cusp, makes this yet another sign of this incarnation being of one of intellectual culmination, a lifetime in which he is culminating the intellectual pursuits, challenges, and confrontations of lifetimes after lifetimes of deep soul work. His 6th House cusp being in Taurus means that his rationalizations take root from within a strong sense of internal values, as this is further intensified by his Capricorn Moon being in his second house as well as his Aquarius Chiron, Aquarius Sun, and the stellium of South Nodes of planets and asteroids. While on the one hand he has an evolutionary intention to objectify and throw off the past conditioning influencing his value system, at the same time he is heavily influenced by it, and so issues such as his Aquarius Chiron wounding around survivor issues ends up being a major influence on the way he analyzes his data and research, and rationalizes his conclusions. As a result, it is not surprising that he became fixated on linking evolution with a concept of natural selection driven through sexual selection. For example, whereas his contemporary developer of natural selection, Alfred Wallace, placed importance on atmospheric pressure and adaptation to local environments, one place they diverged from shared philosophy can be see when Darwin argued with him by placing greater importance on sexual selection. In fact, it seemed Darwin saw sexual selection as an explanation for just about everything- even in cases where points Wallace made about the development of a certain color in a species evolving through an adaptation to a local environment rather than a by-product of sexual selection made logical sense. Sexual selection, as well as the other obsessive tenet he clung to in his analysis of evidence, competition amongst members of the same species, both connect to Darwin's timeless and ancient survivor issues of his second house.
The fact that the ruler of Darwin's 6th House is in Aries, however, brings in a different energy to his analytical mindset- Aries Venus makes his a dynamic thinker who is able to individuate his mindset and perceptions away from consensus thought and influences and connect it more strongly with his own intuitive sense. This rationalizing functioning of his mental abilities is more of Darwin's comfort zone, as the South Node of his Moon is also in the sign of Taurus. He is well accustomed to analyzing data and research, and rationalizing possible theories of meaning. However, because of the signs in his birth chart indicating past societal conditioning of his root value system, and with the ruler of his sixth house cusp being Venus in Aries at the root of his birth chart, a soul level challenge for him this incarnation is throwing off these previous belief systems that influence how he perceives and analyzes his research and scientific experimentation. This is especially intense in his case as the South Node of his Mercury is conjunct his Capricorn Moon, as well as the South Nodes of his Saturn, Venus, and Vesta. Sometimes scientists like to believe they are "objective" and practicing an "objective" practice of cause, effect, and correlation, but in reality everyone has subjective perceptions that influence their mental analysis, including scientists. Darwin has a soul purpose of objectifying how he is influenced by societal conditioning and opening up his frame of reference he analyzes research from in this incarnation, taking in a more expansive, abstract, and conceptual frame of reference. This is truly a destined evolution of consciousness for Darwin this lifetime, as the North Node of his Mercury is in Pisces and conjunct his natal Pisces Mercury, both of which are in balsamic conjunction to his Pisces Pluto and Ceres. This strong Pisces energy in connection with his Mercury function is there to help him dissolve the thought patterns of past incarnations that are ultimately limiting for his soul's journey.
Pisces Mercury is not the easiest Mercury to have when trying to create logical arguments and a rational explanation of evidence that can clearly connect challenging intellectual theories that confront establishments of consensus thought, such as beliefs connected with the dominant Christian church establishment. Mercury in Pisces can have difficulty choosing words that are capable of embodying the whole of its perceptual abilities, especially when a Mercury is in Pisces and in trine to a Uranus in Scorpio like Darwin had. This Mercury-Uranus trine would give him lightning insight and sudden illumination of thought that he would have difficulty bringing down into traditional language structure at times- at best he would only be able to capture a fraction of his perception with his words. However, since Darwin has his Pisces Mercury in his third house, this would give him a greater ability to communicate his understanding in language that could be understood by others, and eventually over time, in part aided by his exhaustive and extensive research, he would gain more confidence in his ability to capture his illuminating insights into language that could be understood by a mass audience in the scientific community and beyond. In addition, since Mercury is in balsamic conjunction to Pluto in Pisces in his third house, this desire to organize an ultimate understanding of phenomenal reality and then communicate this knowledge to the world at large is connected with a deep soul history- so in other words, he has been working on this issue in past incarnations, making it ultimately less of a struggle, but in process and in the midst of experiencing difficulties with communication issues, it would make the experience painful on a personality level, as the difficulties would trigger deep soul memories of challenges and even trauma connected with communication. With Pisces Mercury as well as the North Node of his Mercury also conjunct Ceres in Pisces along with Pluto, he would have his own nurturing of self issues connected with this research, and would have an obsessive drive to complete his research, even possess his research, so much so that it would take some traumatic events and deaths, to close family members and loved ones, to force him to let go of his intellectual pursuits at times. This is another aspect of the dissolving of limiting thought patterns symbolized by the strong connection of his Mercury function with Pisces.
As we have discussed previously, having a Moon in Capricorn could be a help in his ability to perceive ways of communicating his developing knowledge to consensus culture in theory, yet since it is ruled by a Sagitarius Saturn that is square his Pisces Mercury, it could also be another sign of deep soul trauma related to an inability to communicate his understanding to the world in an influential manner. This issue is further intensified by his Pisces Mercury being ruled by a Sagitarius Neptune that is in balsamic conjunction to Saturn in his 12th House, and also in square to his Mercury. These challenges in communication are incredibly intense on a soul level to Darwin, as symbolized by his Pisces Mercury being in balsamic conjunction to Ceres and Pluto. He is utterly attached to his scientific experiments and theorizing through intense soul desires to develop an ultimate understanding for the connection of everything and the ultimate understanding of creation and phenomenal reality. While the connection with Ceres and Pluto also connects with emotional attachments to his children and loved ones, the Virgo aspect of the Ceres archetype is especially prominent in his chart with regards to being obsessed with productivity in the intellectual realm. As a result, having a Pisces Jupiter was a true blessing for Darwin, especially a Pisces Jupiter in his third house, a Pisces Jupiter that is the ruler of his Sagitarius Neptune. Related to the ambitions of his Capricorn Moon, and his past lives obsessive desire to develop a new intellectual framework organizing ultimate understanding of reality and creation, having a Pisces Jupiter in his third house helped him overcome his communication issues in order to develop a vast network of research facilities and support that allowed him to accumulate an inexhaustive body of work and scientific evidence in support of his theories.
Moreover, Darwin's Pisces Jupiter being in his third house would lend extra strength to the calling of his Mercury and North Node of Mercury being in Pisces in the third house. Darwin was meant to have a strong Jupiterian or "right brain" approach to thinking, an inductive analytical ability that could link countless strands and fragments of diverse research into a holistic understanding tied into a strongly developed conceptual philosophy, such as natural selection as the organizing principle of his research. The trine between Scorpio Uranus and Pisces Mercury is also a help, with Scorpio Uranus being in the 11th House, Darwin was repeatedly able to individuate illuminating conceptual thought, as well as connect with liberated intellectual communities of support for his work. There is also a new phase semi-sextile between Darwin's Aquarius Chiron and his Pisces Mercury, corresponding with the new identity Darwin developed for himself out of connection to his deep Chironic soul wounds this lifetime, an empowering identity that would forge forward and not hide due to wounding, and an ability to use his Pisces Mercury as a guide to help him focus on and discover connections that will reveal the new purpose of his evolution in consciousness this lifetime.
Another important aspect to his Pisces Mercury is an almost gibbous sesquiquadrate from his Libra Mars in his 10th House. This in part relates to his career ambitions and desire to have an important public role in connection with his Mercury pursuits, and how he could come across resistance from the needs of his social environment, including his role as a father and the influence of his own father (10th House). First, Darwin had to overcome the influence of his own father on his studies, at first going along with some of his father's hopes for his intellectual development as far as enrolling in certain schools or fields of study, but never fully engaging his Pisces Mercury until he was focused upon his own deep mental soul work. In addition, through his own role as father, he had to refrain from going deeper into research or pursuing certain goals related to a public image at times because of needing to tend to his own children, especially the illness of his own children at times. In connection with his Pisces, third house, Mercury work this lifetime, this Libra Mars sesquiquadrate also reflects his need to refine his research, analysis, and explanation of findings in order to fit it into a conceptual framework that could be expressed into the existing social environment and context of his life and culture.
Finally, I wonder about the impact of his Saturn-Neptune conjunction in Sagitarius being square to his Pisces Mercury. It seems like yet another symbol of past conditioning to break free from, similar to the South Node of his Mercury being conjunct his Capricorn Moon being a sign of past life conditioning constantly entering into the field of his perceptual awareness. I was reading about how Alfred Wallace began diverging from natural selection into some more spiritualist exploration of the evolution of human consciousness, such as that natural selection could not account for higher human mental faculties such as mathematical, artistic, or musical genius, and that there could be a purpose to the universe that involved the evolution of the human spirit and consciousness- apparently, these ideas disturbed Darwin, and he maintained that sexual selection explained mental phenomena as well. I do not here mean to argue one way or the other, only that it seems Darwin was more prone to focus on sexuality as a causative force more so than spiritual concepts. I wonder if this stems from some deep wounds related to organized religion, including lives in which he was a power player in organized religion as well as on the receiving end of trauma from organized religion- so much so that in his intellectual theorizing he had difficulty consciously integrating a spiritual element. With his strong second house, South Node of the Moon in Taurus, and sixth house ruled by Taurus, he was much more comfortable tying his conceptual understanding into issues of sexuality, connecting his theories of evolution to survival pressure of species competing with one another for resources and mates.
with gratitude and love,
Most Active Member
Posts: 9652
Re: JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ...
Reply #144 on:
May 06, 2013, 08:26 AM »
Hi Gray,
Thanks for taking the time that you have to do the EA work of why Darwin chose the Mercury placement, in total, that you have. Your EA analysis is as excellent as it is brilliant in terms of the interaction of his past life symbols that lead to the symbols within his birth chart: his current life. Your EA reasoning being exceptionally sound as you demonstrated how and why Darwin thunk in the ways that he did. Within this the interaction of his inductive/ deductive mental / intuitive perceptions that allowed him to develop the ideas and theories that he did, and how this itself was conditioned by his own past which involved his own prior religious conditioning within the fear of being harshly by his peers who were defined by their own conditioning. At the same time his Soul desire/ need to establish his own authority in such a way as to feel threatened by those who disagreed with him, and his reaction to those that did.
You then state and wonder: "Finally, I wonder about the impact of his Saturn-Neptune conjunction in Sagitarius being square to his Pisces Mercury. It seems like yet another symbol of past conditioning to break free from, similar to the South Node of his Mercury being conjunct his Capricorn Moon being a sign of past life conditioning constantly entering into the field of his perceptual awareness. I was reading about how Alfred Wallace began diverging from natural selection into some more spiritualist exploration of the evolution of human consciousness, such as that natural selection could not account for higher human mental faculties such as mathematical, artistic, or musical genius, and that there could be a purpose to the universe that involved the evolution of the human spirit and consciousness- apparently, these ideas disturbed Darwin, and he maintained that sexual selection explained mental phenomena as well. I do not here mean to argue one way or the other, only that it seems Darwin was more prone to focus on sexuality as a causative force more so than spiritual concepts. I wonder if this stems from some deep wounds related to organized religion, including lives in which he was a power player in organized religion as well as on the receiving end of trauma from organized religion- so much so that in his intellectual theorizing he had difficulty consciously integrating a spiritual element. With his strong second house, South Node of the Moon in Taurus, and sixth house ruled by Taurus, he was much more comfortable tying his conceptual understanding into issues of sexuality, connecting his theories of evolution to survival pressure of species competing with one another for resources and mates."
The answer is yes.
Simply and excellent and brilliant EA analysis Gray. This is how EA is meant to be done, and it helps others in understanding exactly that.
God Bless, Rad
ari moshe
Most Active Member
Posts: 1323
Re: JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ...
Reply #145 on:
May 06, 2013, 09:32 AM »
Gonzalo, I know I speak for myself, though likely many others here - that I learn a great amount from your analyses. So even if you start over, perhaps you could still share your detailed analysis? If this is not the right space for that, then I'd love to receive it privately if that felt right to you.
With much love,
Most Active Member
Posts: 9652
Re: JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ...
Reply #146 on:
May 06, 2013, 09:42 AM »
Quote from: Gonzalo on May 05, 2013, 10:01 PM
Hi Rad
ok, and thanks for the direction, but this then means to start anew, since I was I was going into some detailed past-lives chapters of Darwin's Mercury, which have been quite revealing to me. I'll try to apply your indication and write a more synthesized way, and not to take too long. Sorry for the delay.
God Bless, Gonzalo
Hi Gonzalo,
You don't need to start over at all. Go ahead a post what you have been doing.
God Bless, Rad
Most Active Member
Posts: 554
Re: JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ...
Reply #147 on:
May 06, 2013, 12:08 PM »
Hi Rad ... group ..
I'm posting what I got so far. It's not meant to be exhaustive or complete.
Thanks so much for everyone's analyses and participation, it is a Blessing to be a part of this community, and thank you so much Rad for the ongoing direction and support to our learning.
God Bless, with love, Gonzalo
A natural image of the Goddess
(a Rock in La Campana, a sacred hill, a place Darwin visited in Chile).
Mercury being Pisces Balsamic conjunct Pluto Pisces in the 3rd House reflects a Soul that has experienced tremendous levels of disillusionment in connection with knowledge forms along many lifetimes. Past experiences of disillusionment have involved massive crises of personal meaning and the meaning of life (Mercury SN 2nd House, Mercury Pisces), and have translated into a series of psychological and emotional dynamics, and to a series of intellectual dynamics, and there is an underlying crises of spiritual nature which relates to disillusionment with the knowledge forms. One reason for the intensity of the crises has been the degree of personal identification with these knowledge forms, and meaning, and ultimate meaning, deposited in these types of knowledge, and the degree of personal identification with types of roles that were associated with the knowledge forms, which have been talked about in prior posts. In natural times, matriarchal older lives, these included knowledge forms of evolved nature received or learnt from other types of beings such as peoples from distant places in the Galaxy with more evolved civilizations, and also beings and Nature spirits, or direct ways from Nature or the Goddess (the Pisces planets and Mercury trine Uranus 11th House, Mercury ruled by Neptune Sagittarius). The knowledge forms received from the more evolved beings had the intention to help humans evolve on Gaia, and to survive 2nd House). With Mercury Pisces and SN Mercury in Capricorn, Neptune Balsamic conjunct Saturn, which rules all the Capricorn south nodes, this relates to knowledge forms about the structural nature of reality, and the connections of structure and form with the wholeness, or phenomenal reality in total (Mercury/Jupiter Pisces), ie. the connection between the finite and the infinite, the microcosm and the macrocosm, the small and the largest. This points to structures created or built by men in pre-patriarchal and pre-urban times which aligned Earth's energy with the overall Cosmos and with distant places in the Galaxy, using various types of sacred knowledge. Mars is conjunct asteroid Astronomy, exactly opposed by Mathesis (26°16' Aries) which is exactly bi-quintile to Saturn, and sextile to the Aquarius 3rd House Pallas, and semi-square to Mercury, and squares the SN of Urania in the 8th House which opposes the Moon and the Capricorn SNs in the 2nd House. This correlates with cutting stones in ways which create unique individual forms and modules which were then placed together in different ways which were aligned with Earth's energies and distant places in the sky. The symbols reflect knowledge and means serving to cut the rock including large rocks very easily and precisely, and perhaps, for suspending the gravity of the stones for their transportation. The rocks were cut by various means, such as wedges and water, or sound, or perhaps some means capable to disintegrate matter (such as the shamir, a type of 'worm' that the legend says was used for building the temple of Solomon). Stones were cut and carved and mounted reflecting sacred geometry designs. These forms were capable to induce a perceptual shift, because of the nature of the forms themselves (and because they were placed in patterns of sacred geometry connecting with the Earth energies), captivating the attention of the observer and shifting the observer's assemblage point expanding the awareness through the interaction in these sacred 'installations'. These structures created a shift in perception because they reflected a geometry (3rd House) in which each form most perfectly contained itself (2nd House), and through containing themselves, contained all in Nature having the same form, including larger totalities. All the possible 'sizes' where contained within these forms.
Because the ruler of the Mercury SN is Saturn/Neptune in the 12th House, and conjuncts the Moon, and Mercury is Pisces, these reflects that the forms used were forms existing in Nature, and which were connected with ancient types of worships of the Goddess or Spirit manifesting in the forms of Nature, such as rocks and mountains. These forms revealed ways in which Spirit or the Goddess manifested and was contained within Creation. This implies how the infinite manifested within the finite or limited. The forms these men created when cutting and arranging these stones were a continuation of the work of Nature/Spirit. At those times prior to patriarchy there was no conflict between form and content, structure and interiority (Capricorn/Cancer). There was neither a conflict between Nature and culture, because these men were aware that they were a part of Nature, just like the other animals and plants, and these structural creations were just ways in which Nature revealed itself through men: forms revealing how the totality is contained within and permeates each part or fragment (Pisces). These forms were defined by a sense of fullness and balance or harmony, ie. the limits or borders were determined by allowing a full development or expansion of the forms from within themselves. The limit or border is a function of forces. Since totality or wholeness (Pisces) is contained within each part (Mercury), and given that the individual limit or border (Capricorn/Cancer) has not been invaded or transgressed, the fullness of the individual form reveals itself as a model of the wholeness. This allowed the individual's attention to connect with the inner time of the stone, or the place, Nature, Gaia, or the Cosmos, ie. concentric layers of memory (Mercury trine Uranus) each one resembling the same volume at different possible 'sizes'. The forms of knowledge supporting these types of work were consistent with nowadays theories such as morphic resonance (ie. that acting on whatever form within space/time creates an effect on all forms sharing a same design) and the field concept (that rather than a world composed primarily of separate objects or particles externally and linearly relating among themselves, reality is composed by fields, or by a unified field, in which flows and interactions occur, in which create particles or objects are just a surface effect).
Because of the take-over of patriarchy, these knowledge forms, cultural projects, and types of work dynamics and social roles, etc. became devaluated, and denigrated, because they did not fit any more within the new 'paradigms'. Patriarchy created a delusory sense of hierarchy between sky and Earth introducing the sky gods and devaluating Gaia. This supported the delusory devaluation of women, through a devaluation of sensation, emotion, sexuality and the body, which were associated with a 'fallen nature' in the new belief systems and Garden of Eden type myths: the ruler of all the Capricorn SNs being Saturn/Neptune in the 12th House, and the Pisces stellium in the 3rd House. These experiences were devastating for the individual, to a point of emotional, mental and spiritual trauma, because of the degree of personal involvement with all this stuff. The individual further experienced emotional betrayal connecting with the collaboration dynamics which now were deprived of the original inspiration that existed in the past. The individual felt fundamentally disillusioned in connection with these knowledge forms.
All this of course had many different manifestations at different levels, including the intellectual orientation, Mercury. One early impact on the intellectual dynamics of Darwin's Soul induced by the patriarchal transition was a separation between Earth reality and Spiritual reality. This of course was created by means of the repression and suppression of emotion and sensation, and natural sexuality which had served as natural ways to connect with wholeness, and was promoted by patriarchal beliefs, opinions and myths that took the place of experiential truths and natural law. Thus, Earth reality was devaluated and all the immanent Spiritual meaning that in earlier times was experienced within Creation was now projected to a higher, transcendent' dimension of 'pure' Spirit. A specific point of the emotional devastation and trauma created by the transition to patriarchy, and the individual's emotional choices in face of this transition, relates to the nature of temples, which became places for sacrifices to the Gods. Other aspect of this relates to the Vesta archetype now manifesting the distorted role of 'sacred prostitution': the SN Vesta is Capricorn and conjuncts the SN Venus, SN Mercury, etc., ruled by Neptune/Saturn 12th House, and Vesta is in the 4th House Aries conjunct Venus, ruled by Mars in the 10th House, ie. how women having knowledge of sacred sexuality became administrated by priests who would assign them to 'selected' males to have sex with these women at the temples. These are specific causes of guilt because of what had been the outcome of temples, and because of the ongoing desires to build these types of "sacred" structures.
Given that Charles Darwin Soul is defined by fundamental desires to know the truth of all (Pluto/Jupiter/Mercury Pisces 3rd House), this alienation from natural emotional reality has impacted the orientation to knowledge along many lifetimes, in different ways. With Venus in Aries 3rd House ruled by Mars in Libra, an important chapter in this process could have taken place in the context of Greek culture, and within this it is possible to find possible specific connections with Pythagoras and with Orphism, and later with Plato and then Aristotle. The possible connections with Pythagorean thought can be seen in the relation between mathematics and music, ie. the idea that the universe is subject to an order which is based on numbers, which create a harmony that translates into music. The relations between music and number were demonstrated by the law of the octave, ie. that the vibration of a string produces different tones within a scale depending on the string length (SN Mercury in the 2nd House Capricorn, ruled by Saturn/Neptune in the 12th House, Mercury in the 3rd House Pisces; Venus in the 3rd House in mutual reception with Mars in the 10th House Libra, Mars is conjunct asteroid Pythagoras and square Orpheus, etc.). It is interesting that Darwin postulated in The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex that human language had evolved from musical primary forms of communication (Musical protolanguage: Darwin's theory of language evolution revisited, by W. Tecumseh Fitch, at:
). Also, it is interesting that, despite Pythagoras considered the universe to be arranged and ordered based on number, he also 'discovered' the problem of incommensurables. The so called Theorem of Pythagoras demonstrates that in a right-angled triangle the area of the square on the hypotenuse (the side opposite the right angle) is equal to the sum of the areas of the squares of the other two sides—that is, a2 + b2 = c2. If the lengths of a and b are equal to 1 (a=1 and b=1), then the length of c is the square root of 2, a number having infinite decimals and which thus cannot be defined by arithmetic, but only by geometry, where the length of the two equal sides is incommensurable with the length of the third side. This is a type of number that were later called 'irrational' and that implied a level of crisis in the Greek philosophical thought because it implied that existing magnitudes of measurable things did not fit within the celestial scheme of numerical perfection. Legends say that whomever revealed the secret of incommensurables would perish drowned in the sea (Pluto/Mercury Pisces ruled by Neptune 12th House, Uranus Scorpio ruled by Pluto and conjunct the NN). The Platonism can be seen in relation with systems defined by a duality and a separation between a changing phenomenal reality which is considered as an illusion, and an eternal and immutable world of pure ideas or forms. In Plato's philosophy, the apparent is ultimately unreal except for its participation in those forms or ideas that are supposed to be unchanging or eternal. Because the Moon and the SN Pluto are conjunct the SN Mercury in Capricorn, we are looking at how emotional dynamics relating to the patriarchal family have conditioned the thought function. In essence, emotion has been suppressed, it is not present, neither in the superior realm of eternal ideas nor in the phenomenal world, except in a distorted appearance. The prior orientation to build integrative structures or forms that aligned or revealed connections between the microcosms and the macrocosms, has derived into desires to conform to an external order or structure, or to create such structures conforming to such an order, which had become the source of meaning for the individual, beyond the orb of all that can perish and can be a source of loss or pain. Because the Aries Venus ruling the South Node in the 5th House, is the ruler of the 10th House cusp and Mars, which in turn rules the 4th and 5th House cusps, and Mars squares the Moon which conjuncts the SN Mercury, with Mercury in the 3rd House Pisces, we can see the thought created need to discriminate between what is legitimate and illegitimate, originating in the patriarchal family structure in which legitimate equals the paternal filiation, and illegitimate means occurring outside the paternal filiation. This scheme has imposed over the prior natural order in which filiation was dependent on alliance, where children were the children of the group or tribe, and thus, dependent on multiple social natural connections. The patriarchal family structure created a conflict and a rivalry between the legitimate and the spurious, in which the spurious appear as claiming or usurping an undue privilege. Same thing with concepts, in which the intellect is now set the task to discriminate within a scheme of rivalry which is the legitimate concept which holds the true connection or participation with the immutable, original idea, existing beyond the mundane. Mercury Pisces 3rd House, SN Mercury in the 2nd House Capricorn, ruled by Saturn/Neptune in the 12th House Sagittarius, illustrates Plato's allegory of the cave, in which men are chained and can only contemplate shadows projected in the cave´s wall, which they consider to be real. The philosopher frees self from the chains and thus becomes capable to contemplate the real objects from which the shadows were only a poor image. Further, same symbols reflect Plato's theory of reminiscence: in this system philosophical reasoning is considered a way for individuals to recognize and remember the underlying immutable essences, because the Soul has known these essences prior to incarnation. On other hand, these schools of thought are oriented to promote philosophical discussion within the city, or Polis, a field in which social order is created and guaranteed by free discussion between free competitors, or friends, based on opinions. Here, the philosopher is defined as a lover of wisdom, and has the task to rectify the opinions of men through reasoning. The role of the philosopher confirms the function of thought as selection between candidates, selection of the true participant in the divine idea. Plato considered the city or state should be organized in a three class structure using the body as a model (Capricorn), with three centers corresponding to three functions: digestive center being the productive workers, respiratory center being the warriors, and the head or reason, which were the philosophers, who Plato considered should be in charge of government (Saturn in Sagittarius). Plato lived during the Gemini period of the Libra sub-age of the Aries age, Athens being an Aries zone, so with Venus being in the 3rd House Aries, ruled by Mars in Libra, there could be direct or indirect connections with this philosopher at those times. This type of orientation will be a base for Darwin's Soul to create sociological trauma because of desires to promote social change.
It seems to me that one essential point within this Greek stage of Darwin's Mercury curriculum is the beginning of a new cycle in which the conceptual extremes created in earlier stages-form and content, structure and interiority, immutability and change, high and low, material and spiritual, body and mind-reach a point of polarization and mutual questioning leading to a way back for progressive integration to take place along lifetimes to come. It is also possible that this stage connects with Soul's desires to integrate back with people in the context of cities, upon lifetimes in which the Soul chose to withdraw and isolate from human interaction (SN Mercury in the 2nd House Capricorn ruled by Saturn/Neptune in the 12th House, Mercury Pisces, ie. withdrawing in order to effect contemplation, and same time because of the fundamental disillusionment with human affairs which combined with desires to relate to the eternal, which the Soul had identified with structures or forms, versus the changing circumstances). This can be seen in the 3rd House Venus being Aries, ruled by Mars in the 10th House being Libra. The intention to begin integrating opposites can be seen in connection with Plato, which in some way addressed the philosophical dichotomy introduced by Pythagoras' problem of incommensurables and reflected in the opposing views of Heraklitus and Parmenides, between Being as immutable or Being as perpetual change. This was addressed in some way by Plato by determining that while something changes, something needs to remain the same. But he referred the unchanging to the world of ideas and the changing to the world of appearances. Later, Aristotle would bring back the celestial ideas or forms and place them within the phenomenal world of things now understood as composed of matter and form, and would directly attempt to determine which types and what degree of change are possible that allow a thing to remain the same, and which types and degrees of change imply a change in nature, ie. the idea of substance and accidental modifications. This organization of difference impacts on Darwin's intellectual organization because the species is defined by a difference with the genus, but in turn is limited by the genus, ie. needing to accommodate difference within parameters of a pre-existing model (asteroid Aristotle is at 24°16' Capricorn, conjunct the SN Mercury and the other SN). Other theme that is possibly condensed in this context concerns the autarchy and autonomy of closed systems that was an aspiration an ideal of the Greek Polis, implying a limitation for evolution, the types of limitations and isolation that served Darwin to observe evolution in the Galapagos, also a reflection of his own isolation and conceptual limitations.
The 3rd House Mercury in Pisces, with the SN Mercury in Capricorn in the 2nd House, reflects desires to understand the mistery of life, and death. Aquarius in the 3rd House cusp ruled by Uranus in the 11th House, trine Mercury, Uranus being conjunct the North Node, reflects the impact of experiences Darwin's Soul felt unable to process or understand intellectually, the extraordinary, and the miraculous. With the Pisces stellium in the 3rd House I wonder Darwin's Soul could have had a lifetime during the time of Jesus of Nazareth (who had a massive Pisces stellium in the 3rd House too). Asteroid Lazzaro is at 15°02' Pisces conjuncting the Pisces planets including Pluto, Jupiter, Ceres, Mercury, and the NN Mercury, and asteroid Martha is at 26°59 Capricorn in the 2nd House, conjunct … the many symbols in Capricorn 2nd House including the SN Mercury, the Moon, and Orpheus: thus, witnessing how a man was called back from death, when the corpse already 'smelled' and who was buried inside a cave: SN Mercury Capricorn, ruled by Saturn/Neptune 12th House, ie., the corpse, or the human organic form already decomposing upon for days after death, Uranus Scorpio 11th House, rising from the death as a manifestation of the will of God, of the Father, Uranus ruled by Pluto Pisces, ruled by Neptune/Saturn, being invoked by the language of the Logos, or Jesus, 3rd House Pisces. Such type of experience would have been shocking for Darwin's Soul, not only because it would have radically challenged his intellectual constructions and beliefs, but also because of the long story of emotional unresolved mourning within his Soul that has been deeply analyzed in this thread.
In general terms, the SN Mercury in the 2nd House Capricorn with the other Mercury/10th House connections reflects that the Soul has had past experiences of reality as ordered and structured, this order and structure being a manifestation of inherent intelligibility reflecting the way God set in motion the Creation. In those most ancient past lives this implied many levels of natural interconnectedness of everything. Because of patriarchal conditioning, this scheme within Darwin's mind lost its inner root, and this inner root was projected into structure itself, which became non-reflective of the suppressed levels of experience of emotional nature which guaranteed the integrity of the system and the unfolding of its evolutionary potential. This then led to the lives where his Soul chose to give ultimate meaning to structure and order themselves. Same time, because this more ancient intellectual order was individuating in nature, ie. the non-invasiveness of the patterns allowed individual forms to manifest and flourish, and further, because of Darwin's Soul egocentric identification with the individual roles in those older lives, the nature of the structural order his Soul sought to recognize in later lives was an order created through the interface of individuals, ie. the 'selective' process occurring between rivals, individuals, wanting to reproduce themselves, their own individual forms. Such procedure does not allow to understand how variation, and evolution, occur. With the natal Mercury being Pisces, the Soul has needed to dissolve prior constructions in order to allow a permeability between different layers and strata existing in the own understanding, for communication to exist between all levels: between the individual and the species, and the other species, but also between the individual and the pre-individual, between the organic and the inorganic, etc. This implies reaching the awareness that structures and non-structured flows, the smooth and the striated (Deleuze) are forever interfacing and creating complex, partial patterns, in which the structures themselves serve a temporary role and later became nothing but the substratum upon which flows keep flowing and new structures arise, and decay: the totality of the past creating the surface or milieau where the present form occurs, by giving new uses to whatever forms created or assembled by the intermingling of layers, and strata, and the fragmentation and de-composition of the substratum. Within this, individual forms arise, serve a purpose or role on the surface of Being, while carrying with them the totality of the past in ways which are much deeper than their individuality. The individual merely allows a portion of the past to reproduce, but the individual is destined to perish, while serving to create conditions for other individuals to play their game. In terms of evolutionary biology, it is the almost infinite genetic potentiality contained in the germinal plasm (Pluto) that will use the individual's reproduction to make its way from the past to a future, even to the cost of the individual (as in the selfish gene model of Dawkins), which only actualizes each time a part of their contained potential. In turn, each individual playing its individual game during its brief existence, creates at least potentially all types of interactions with other individuals, layers and strata of organic and inorganic nature, introducing some level of disorder that will not only have an impact on the reproductive possibilities of individuals, but will also condition the portions of the past contained in the individual DNAs that have a chance to manifest, and intensify their evolutionary rate. Darwin was about to discover that "transmission of genes is secondary in relation to information and communication strictly speaking, there is no transmission of flows but rather the communication of a code or an axiomatic which informs the flows (Keith Ansel Pearson, Germinal Life, The Difference and Repetition of Deleuze)". This involves all levels, including the pre-individual, the species, and the ecologic, social and cosmic levels within open and non-centered systems. A simple example shall serve to demonstrate this last point. What if because of new cultural values the surviving, 'fittest' human individuals were not only the toughest, but also the most sensitive? This would serve for the human species to manifest and actively evolve potential capacities contained in the human dna, and carried in each generation in a state of latency or a 'virtual state' until allowed to manifest because of new ways of interaction. Across the boundaries of individuals, between species, between the organic and the inorganic, all types of flows and migrations occur, which trigger devolopments and induce changes that have nothing to do with heredity, and in which new forms emerge that have nothing to do with some original model. Everything occurs within a plane of immanence. The role of flows of information and code (Mercury) within evolution Darwin was about to discover can be illustrated by the Churinga of the Aranda people from Central Australia, Clause Levi-Strauss wrote about. "The Churinga are stone or wooden objects [with which the Aranda] represent the body of an ancestor and which then, generation after generation, are solemnly presented to the individual in whom it is believed the ancestor is repeatedly reincarnated (Giorgio Agamben, Infancy and History)". By this device, social structure and interaction between individuals manifesting in the surface of being, allows the 'larval' individual to recover clue portions of its entire Soul memory (Mercury), energy that will allow the individual to become what it needs to become, in service of its group and the totality. During the short time of the individual's life, all it can do in service of the total evolution is to interface with others in ways that create conditions allowing their potential to actualize: only to emit signs and create patterns that reverberate with deep partial structures coming from the past in search of completion and fulfillment, so that they can reach their own 'perfection', became a richer substratum and leave their place to deeper emerging possibilities until the 'origin' of all totally reveals itself in the manifest Creation (Mercury/Pluto/Jupiter conjunction in Pisces means desires to understand the dna of God within Creation, ie. immanence). In order to reach such understanding, Darwin needed to Pisces dissolve prior intellectual orientations focused on the manifest, and individual, structures, and to shift the focus to the pre-individual and the multiple and collective as emerging orders (Mercury trine to Uranus). Further, because of the prior thought structures in which reality had to conform to a model, in which difference (Mercury, Uranus) was understood as something missing or not conforming to the original or 'ideal', he now needed to understand difference as positive, and constitutive of being. This means to understand difference as individuating, or individuation is differentiating, and to understand that difference, occurring by means of new arrangements or assemblages within the pre-individual substratum, is an affirmative and creative manifestation (Full phase trine Uranus/Mercury) of pre-individual intensities. Thus, the necessary primacy of emotion and feeling for evolution to occur (SN Mercury 2nd House, Gemini in the 7th House, Taurus on the 6th House cusp, Mercury/Pluto in Pisces), because the depths that whatever sign or code, or memory, is capable to activate is dependent not on the sign itself but on the reverberation or resonance it is allowed to produce beneath the surface, and within the living past contained or carried within each individual.
Last Edit: May 06, 2013, 07:34 PM by Gonzalo
Most Active Member
Posts: 9652
Re: JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ...
Reply #148 on:
May 07, 2013, 08:20 AM »
Hi Gonzalo,
Thanks for taking the time that you have to work on the EA of why and how Darwin chose the Mercury archetype, and the totality of it's various signatures in his chart, that he did. It seems to me that what you have done with this is to present your own cosmological/ metaphysical/ and natural science pondering and understandings in which you then try to interface the various Mercury symbols in Darwin's chart with relative to the individual archetypes of all those symbols.
In so doing you have not actually individualized Darwin's Soul itself: you seem to be fitting him into the broad strokes of your own cosmological, etc, understandings. This is not to say that your understandings of such is not astute and comprehensive because it of course is. But you really have not individualized the Soul of Darwin relative to his relevant birth symbols, the totality of the Mercury archetype, in his actual life. For your own personal / evolutionary purposes I do understand why you are approaching it this way and that of course is your way which is just fine. But for the purposes of the specific and individualized evolutionary journey of Darwin's Soul relative to his Mercury archetypes it is not: either for your own specific understanding of his Soul, or for those who are trying to understand the correct way of applying the EA paradigm itself. What you have presented, relative to the Darwin symbols that you used, is more about how humans in general would naturally think in order to understand the phenomenal nature of the Creation.
This is not to say that I already know that you can do just that: you have demonstrated your EA capacity for a long time now on this message board. Your last EA analysis relative to the prior step in the planetary method, Darwin's Moon, amply demonstrates this.
It is the individualized context of Darwin's Soul that is lacking here Gonzalo. The individual Soul past that lead to the present which of course set's up the Soul's future. For example the life the preceded the Soul of Darwin was one of the greatest explorers of all time, a man named William Dampier. He circumnavigated our Earth three times, has been considered the first natural historian of Australia, and in fact sailed to the Galapagos Islands themselves and began to draw out the various life forms there: at that time. I mention this because this reflects the individualized context of Darwin's Soul that demonstrates the natural flow of the Soul from life to life. Remember the S.Node of Darwin's Mercury through geodetic equivalents correlates with the Galapagos Islands. And that S.Node is ruled by Saturn/Neptune in Sagittarius in the 12th House forming squares to all those Pisces planets in his 3rd including natal Mercury conjunct it's own N.Node. The S.Node ruler, Venus in Aries in the 3rd is trine those same symbols, and that is ruled by his Mars in the 10th which then squares the S.Node of Mercury, his Moon, and all the others S.Nodes there. This is a classic signature of world explorer on the high seas who achieved relative fame in his own life as Dampier. Of course the Saturn/Neptune symbol in the 12th also correlates with islands within the ocean. That S.Node by house, the 5th, of course correlates with Australia. It's ruler, Venus is Aries, correlates with England which was his place of birth.
Again, I want to say to you that I know you know how to do the work of EA. You are in fact brilliant in your own unique way with EA. It's just that, relative to our current step in the planetary method, you have got a little bit carried away with your own cosmological, metaphysical, and natural science understandings and then trying to fit Darwin to that.
God Bless, Rad
Last Edit: May 07, 2013, 11:39 AM by Rad
Most Active Member
Posts: 554
Re: JWG'S Planetary Method of Chart Interpretation ...
Reply #149 on:
May 07, 2013, 06:10 PM »
Hi Rad
Thanks so much for the kind feedback … and .. God, what can I say? .. "my crazy head .. when will you come back to me?" Gosh, when will I be able to correctly interpret the individual Mercury, and by the way, to finish the book? .. answer: "when you stop thinking with your head"
God Bless, Gonzalo
Go Up
« previous
next »
Jump to:
Please select a destination:
=> Evolutionary Astrology Q&A
Study Materials
=> Misc.
Powered by SMF 1.1.21
SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
design by Crip


text:
That's the point -- enlightenment, awakening, is just a story. We all subscribe to different stories of awakening. Some people like to imagine that their story is more solid, more real, that the stories of others. Certainly I have been guilty of this.Vidyaraja wrote:Malcolm wrote: Basically, it is really pretty simple. All yogic paths in Indian religion and its offshoots, whether Buddhist, Jain or Hindu, whether in India or Tibet, or China, etc., accept one thing in common: in order to cease taking rebirth in samsara, one must deal somehow with the kleṣas that drive rebirth.
That is true, but their views on the means to this can be deeply variant.
Basically, the fact that there is a story of awakening at all is the essence of Dharma. What does not matter very much are the details, except to you, the practitioner. If you ask me what story of awakening I like, I will very swiftly tell you that I like the story of awakening as it is presented in the teachings of self-liberation, Dzogchen. I like it more than the story of awakening presented in the path of renunciation or the path of transformation. I like it more than the story of awakening presented in Samkhya, Trika, Vedanta and so on. The vehicle of self-liberation is my preferred story. I can't convince you to accept my story of liberation anymore than I could have been convinced of it when I was committed to Buddhism as a religion by someone else. Likewise, I cannot convince any one here of any story about liberation they are not disposed to believe.
But the one thing we share is that we all subscribe to narrative about liberation otherwise we would not be here discussing these issues. And that is why there is no closed Canon in Buddhism, why there never can be.
Buddhists, like all other religionists, like to think that they are the only ones who have a true story. Among Buddhists, all assert their preferred story of liberation as the best, or most practical, or the only possible, or the most historically accurate, and so on.
We Dharma practitioners demonstrate our commitment to our preferred stories by the choices we make, and the practices we do. But in the end we are merely making a commitment to a narrative of liberation we have decided to accept. And that is completely subjective, personal and non-verifiable. No one's putative awakening is verifiable by any objective, empirical standard -- and in these conversations about liberation we all behave as if there were some objective criteria by which liberation can be measured. This is absurd. Every standard by which we can measure liberation and awakening is a complete and utterly arbitrary mental line drawn in space. All of our narratives of liberation come from space too, just like clouds billowing in the sky.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Description:IBM ServeRAID M5110 PCI-e SAS/SATA RAID ControllerPart Number(s)
IBM Part# 81Y4481
Overview:The ServeRAID M5110 SAS/SATA controller is part of the IBM ServeRAID M series family that offers a complete server storage solution consisting of RAID controllers, cache/flash modules, energy packs, and software feature upgrades in an ultra-flexible offerings structure. This product is optimized to deliver the performance that is demanded by the ever-growing I/O requirements of today's enterprises. The M5110 comes as a small form factor PCIe adapter. It also shares a common set of upgrades, simplifying inventory management.


text:
by Wendy A. Horwitz
"Your feet are crying," Angela said, cradling my heels in her hands. "You can't hear because your heart is up there, but they are close to my heart." I was sitting in the pedicure chair, and Seong Angela Heo, who goes by her middle name, dabbed tea tree oil on my toes, as she'd recommended I do several months prior. I hadn't followed her advice. "You must do this every day," she said gently.
Angela has been a technician for one-and-a-half years at Diamond Spa, 8430 Germantown Ave. in Chestnut Hill. A petite woman with a warm smile and short brown hair, she has worked as an insurance agent, written a column for "Peace Times" in Flushing, NY, and published in magazines in South Korea, where she was born. When she was a child, her uncle gave her a special pen because she aspired to be a poet.
"I never thought I'd wash people's feet," she told me when we met over tea at Chestnut Hill Coffee Company, a week after my appointment in November. "But I love the job. It is humbling, and sometimes," she hesitated, "a holy experience."
I was surprised. Although I enjoy pedicures, I've been secretly embarrassed, wondering how one deals with others' calluses and toenails. Besides, my feet are ugly; as a child, I sat on them to hide them. How was it to sit at our feet day after day, grooming this trammeled part of the human body? To gather around an impatient client, like workers around a queen bee; mani-pedi, done? We are hand-in-hand at manicure tables, but perhaps divided by unacknowledged differences, and potentially, by names that some clients might have trouble pronouncing.
But Angela prefers her baptismal name, the English one. She was raised in South Jeolla (Chonnam) Province, on tiny Sorok Island. Her childhood was a strictly religious Catholic one. She loved when the sisters took the children on hikes or to the beach, using nature as props for doctrine and stories. As a teen, Angela found Catholicism constraining, and she was more inclined to Buddhism. Nevertheless, she was very observant: "People said I would be a nun," she smiled mischievously, "but I wanted to be a bishop!" In 1980, she immigrated to the United States. One of eight daughters, Angela married and had a son and a daughter.
She acknowledges that technicians at some salons do not enjoy their work. After financial necessity motivated her to get her license, Angela was surprised how much she liked doing nail and skin care. She had already re-embraced Catholicism, and it has been her deep religious faith, along with experience in holistic health, that informs her approach. Health, she told me, is the real beauty.
"I tell clients that the polish is pretty, but it hides the toes. Do not cover up; give the nail a rest and let it breathe." Some clients are annoyed, but others are thrilled to see their skin and nails heal from fungus and other problems. "If we are hiding," she said, "We never heal."
Leaning across the coffee shop table, Angela whispered, "Sometimes, I talk too much at work. We are supposed to keep a quiet atmosphere." So she focuses on touch and massage to help heal a client's body and perhaps, to reach the psyche and even the soul. Her work has become as much a religious practice as a technical skill.
She still writes, too. "My poems are more like a prayer now. Earlier, some were about a cold wind to my heart. Now, loud and soft winds; all are God calling." Her family wanted to publish her essays, but Angela didn't want to burden her children with the feeling that they had to read it all, in Korean. Also, "There is a storm of books in the world, too many," she said. "I don't want to add to that."
At one spa appointment, I told Angela about my father, who had enlisted as a doctor in a Mobile Army Surgical Hospital (M.A.S.H.) during the Korean War. When I was growing up, he never talked about it nor showed his many photographs. More recently, he became quite public about his experience.
Angela listened and then said something that took my breath away. "You must thank your father for me. For my country, what he did to help." "Thank him?" I repeated. "Yes, please thank him."
We were quiet. She smoothed warm stones over my calves. "Sit back, relax," she said.
We go to spas to relax, to feel pretty, to enjoy the conviviality. Diamond Spa is serene and friendly with its taupe decor, soft music, comfy massage chairs. But the touch of a hand at our feet may do more than disguise middle-aged toes under sparkling polish. Angela taught me that.
Wendy Horwitz is a freelance writer and psychologist who resides in Mt. Airy with her two children.


text:
As the year 1999 began, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena, California, was arguably closer to launching a robotic Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission than ever before. About one martian year (roughly two Earth years) earlier, NASA had committed to the decade-long Mars Surveyor Program, the culminating mission of which was to be MSR.
By late 1998, JPL had settled on an MSR mission design based on the Mars Orbit Rendezvous (MOR) mode. This was not surprising, since JPL had staunchly advocated MOR MSR almost without stint since the early 1970s.
In the early 1970s, JPL was responsible for building the Viking Orbiter under the direction of NASA Langley Research Center. At the time, it was widely assumed that NASA's first MSR mission would occur in the late 1970s or early 1980s and would be based on Viking hardware designs. If NASA selected the MOR mode, then it would need an MSR orbiter, which would, presumably, be based on JPL's Viking Orbiter design. MOR's chief rival, Direct-Ascent, would not need JPL's orbiter because it would launch samples from a large Viking Lander-derived MSR lander directly from the surface of Mars back to Earth. Because Direct-Ascent MSR meant no orbiter, it meant no role for JPL. The Caltech-managed laboratory thus supported MOR MSR. This institutional preference had become thoroughly ingrained by the early 1980s.
In MOR MSR's most basic form, samples collected on Mars's surface would reach Mars orbit on board a small ascent vehicle. A waiting Mars orbiter would perform rendezvous maneuvers and retrieve the samples, then would depart Mars orbit for Earth. Splitting the Mars ascent and Earth-return functions between a small ascent vehicle and an orbiter would enable a smaller, lighter Mars lander than would be possible using the Direct-Ascent mode. In theory, this would trim overall mission mass. The reduced mass meant that the MOR MSR spacecraft could leave Earth on a smaller, cheaper launch vehicle or could include a more massive science payload – for example, the lander might carry a rover that would enable sample collection beyond the immediate landing site.
One can argue, however, that MOR increases mission complexity and thus the risk of overall MSR mission failure. JPL's 1998-1999 MOR MSR plan aimed to reduce risk by collecting samples from two different martian surface sites using landers launched from Earth during two consecutive Earth-Mars transfer opportunities (specifically, in 2003 and 2005). After completing its 90-day sample-collection mission, each lander would launch to Mars orbit a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) bearing a spherical Orbiting Sample (OS) canister. To help keep the price tag of its MSR mission under a strict cost cap, NASA had invited the French space agency, Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES), to provide the MSR orbiter.
At the August 1999 AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialist Conference in Girdwood, Alaska, a team of engineers from JPL and another from JPL contractor Charles Stark Draper Laboratory (CSDL) presented papers in which they examined how the CNES orbiter might perform rendezvous with the 2003 and 2005 OSs. They proposed a complex MOR orbital operations strategy consisting of preliminary, intermediate, and terminal rendezvous phases.
In 2003, OS preliminary rendezvous would begin with MAV liftoff. The 2003 MSR lander would be rated to function on Mars for 90 days, so its MAV would need to launch from Mars within 90 days of touchdown. The 2003 OS would thus reach Mars orbit no later than April 2004. To save money and ensure adequate development time, the JPL MSR mission would employ a simplified solid-propellant MAV with a spin-stabilized first stage and a second stage with only a simple guidance system.
In their paper, the JPL engineers noted that even small OS orbit errors could place significant rendezvous propulsion demands on the CNES orbiter. An OS dispersion of only 1° in inclination, for example, would require that the orbiter alter its velocity by 60 meters per second to match orbits, which would require an additional 48 kilograms of propellants.
For their MOR calculations, they assumed that a MAV capable of reliably placing the OS into a circular orbit 600 kilometers above Mars (plus or minus 100 kilometers) and inclined 45° to the planet's equator (plus or minus 1°) could be developed. They assume that the OS would take the form of a 14-to-16-centimeter sphere covered with solar cells that would power a radio beacon. The OS power system would include no batteries, so the beacon would broadcast only when the cells were in sunlight.
Between 24 July and 26 August 2006, the CNES orbiter would arrive in 250-by-1400-kilometer Mars orbit inclined 45° to Mars's equator. Once there, it would activate its Radio Direction Finder (RDF) to begin a four-week hunt for the 2003 OS. The RDF, which would collect OS data for relay to controllers on Earth, would have a range of 3000 kilometers. The JPL engineers suggested that other spacecraft in Mars orbit (Europe's Mars Express, the U.S. Mars Surveyor 2001 orbiter, or a specialized U.S. navigation & communications orbiter proposed for launch in 2003) might augment data from the CNES orbiter's RDF.
On 24 September 2006, controllers on Earth would begin the intermediate rendezvous phase by commanding the CNES orbiter to perform the Nodal Phasing Initiation (NPI) maneuver, the first in a series of maneuvers over 19 weeks designed to nearly match orbits with the 2003 OS. Radio signal roundtrip travel time would gradually increase from 23 to 43 minutes over the 19 weeks as Mars and Earth moved apart in their Sun-centered orbits.
At the start of the intermediate phase, both OS and orbiter would travel in orbits inclined about 45° to Mars's equator; however, their orbits would have different ascending and descending nodes (that is, they would cross the equator at different places) and thus different orbital planes. In the planned 2003 OS orbit, the nodes would shift along the equator at the rate of 6.09° per day. This shifting, called regression of the nodes, would occur because of irregularities in the martian gravity field. The NPI would adjust the CNES orbiter's orbit so that its nodes would shift at a slightly faster rate, enabling it to gradually match nodes with the 2003 OS.
Between 8 October and 5 November 2006, Mars would be behind the Sun as viewed from Earth and largely out of radio contact. No maneuvers would occur during this solar conjunction period, though nodal phasing would of course continue.
The Nodal Phasing Termination maneuver on 7 January 2007, would see the 2003 OS and the CNES orbiter in nearly the same orbital plane. At the end of the intermediate rendezvous phase (4 February 2007), the orbiter would trail 400 kilometers behind and two kilometers below the OS. In its slightly lower (thus slightly faster) orbit, the orbiter would close with the OS at a rate of 200 kilometers per day (about 8.3 kilometers per hour).
In their paper, the CSDL engineers proposed a "double coelliptic" rendezvous strategy for the week-long terminal rendezvous phase. The CNES orbiter would fire its rocket motor about two days before planned OS capture to place itself in an orbit only 0.2 kilometers lower than that of the OS. This would slow the closing rate to about 20 kilometers per day (about 0.8 kilometers per hour).
The orbiter would acquire the OS with its twin Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) lasers as it closed to within five kilometers. At a distance of 0.4 kilometers, it would perform several maneuvers to intersect the OS's orbit 80 meters ahead of the OS. As it crossed the OS's path, it would fire its motor again to precisely match orbits.
The orbiter would then keep station with the OS for four hours. During this period, controllers on Earth would check the orbiter's systems. If everything checked out as normal, they would give the orbiter the go-ahead to perform OS capture. If all went as planned, the CNES orbiter would automatically capture the 2003 OS on 11 February 2007.
The 2005 OS preliminary rendezvous would overlap the 2003 OS intermediate rendezvous. For purposes of their study, the JPL engineers assumed that the 2005 MAV would deliver its OS to Mars orbit on 8 October 2006, the last possible day before the start of solar conjunction. The 2005 OS would be targeted to an orbit matching as closely as possible that planned for the CNES orbiter at the time it captured the 2003 OS.
Intermediate rendezvous in 2005 would begin immediately after 2003 OS capture (that is, at the end of the 2003 OS Terminal Rendezvous phase) on 11 February 2007. Nodal phasing would end after 13 weeks, on 13 May 2007, and the 2005 OS Intermediate Rendezvous phase would end on 10 June 2007.
The 2005 OS terminal rendezvous would resemble its 2003 counterpart. The CNES orbiter would capture the 2005 OS on 17 June 2007, then would begin a series of maneuvers over the next four weeks to place itself into the proper orbital plane for departure for Earth on 21 July 2007.
The JPL engineers calculated that each 10-meter-per-second velocity change made during intermediate rendezvous would require about eight additional kilograms of orbiter propellants and subsystem mass at launch from Earth, and that the CNES orbiter would need to make velocity changes totaling 478 meters per second during intermediate rendezvous if it would have a 99% probability of successfully capturing both the 2003 and 2005 OSs. This would imply a rendezvous propellant mass of 382.4 kilograms. They noted that the MSR Project required only a 99% probability of retrieving one OS, and that this level of reliability could be achieved with an orbiter capable of velocity changes totaling 349 meters per second. This would reduce the required propellant mass to 279.2 kilograms.
The CSDL engineers added that a 99% probability of successfully retrieving one OS meant a 60% probability of retrieving both. They calculated that terminal rendezvous using the propellant-saving double coelliptic rendezvous strategy would require orbiter velocity changes totaling only a little more than one meter per second up to the 80-meter stationkeeping point, and no more than 4.6 meters per second from the 80-meter point up until OS capture.
Shortly after the JPL and CSDL teams presented their papers, on 23 September 1999, JPL and its contractor, Lockheed Martin, accidentally destroyed the Mars Climate Orbiter as it arrived at Mars. On 3 December 1999, the Mars Polar Lander disappeared without a trace during descent to the martian surface, the victim of a software error that turned off its descent engines while it was still about 40 meters above the surface. The twin mishaps led to a profound shake-up in the NASA Mars program and postponement of the first MSR mission.
"Mars Orbit Rendezvous Strategy for the Mars 2003/2005 Sample Return Mission," AIAA 99-306, Louis A. D'Amario, Willard E. Bollman, Wayne J. Lee, Ralph B. Roncoli, John C. Smith, Ramachandra S. Bhat, and Raymond B. Frauenholz; paper presented at the AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialist Conference in Girdwood, Alaska, 16-19 August 1999.
"Terminal Rendezvous Analysis and Design for the 2003/2005 Mars Sample Return Mission," AIAA 99-307, Peter S. Kachmar, Christopher N. D'Souza, and Timothy J. Brand; paper presented at the AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialist Conference in Girdwood, Alaska, 16-19 August 1999.
This post is the fourth in a series. Below are listed the posts in this series in chronological order.
Martian Weight Problem: Mars Sample Return Version 0.7 (1998) – http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/12/mars-sample-return-version-0-7-1998/
Model Rockets on Mars (1998) – http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/06/model-rockets-on-mars-1998/
Model Rockets on Mars Redux (1998) – http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/07/model-rockets-on-mars-redux-1998/
Robot Rendezvous in Mars Orbit (1999) – this post
Mars Sample Return: Vive le retour des échantillons martiens! (1999) – http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/08/vive-retour-dechantillons-martiens-1999/Go Back to Top. Skip To: Start of Article.