Need help with Astrology and Astronomy!!

EdNet · Post by **EdNet** » Tue Dec 06, 2005 1:49 am

Hi All :o ..
Do we see our zodiac stars .. i mean.. constellation extremely bright during the certain period of how they categorize them ??
As in .. e.g. Aquarius is from 21 Jan to 19 Feb.. does it mean that the Aquarius constellations are most brightly seen ???

Or is there something else on these days of that particular zodiac periods .. ?? Is there different to wat we see in the sky at diff. zodiac's periods :?: :?:

Post by **Airconvent** » Tue Dec 06, 2005 1:58 am

they are unrelated.

when the ancients look up the heavens, they saw patterns and gave them names. for example, the europeans saw ursa major as a big bear or a dipper while the chinese saw it as a royal carriage. how bright stars are depends on how clear the sky is, not time of the year.

somewhere between then and now, to make it more understandable to the superstitious masses of the time, astrologers made use of the constellations as symbols for their cause.

as I mentioned in another thread, astrology has ABSOLUTELY no relation to physical astronomy. you are seeing different constellations during diff parts of the year because the earth is moving around the sun, so you can only see the part that is facing away from the sun.

neoterryjoe · Post by **neoterryjoe** » Tue Dec 06, 2005 2:13 am

Hi!
Constellations of the zodiac lie on this path we call the ecliptic. It is also the path taken by the sun in the day. It takes the sun 365 days to complete the ecliptic. If you could see the constellations in the day, they would correspond to the zodiac duration, not that the constellations would become brighter.
Planets also take the path of the ecliptic and hence astrology arises as planets are symbols and have significances in astrology. Believers felt that if a certain planet cross a zodiac sign, a certain event or happening might befall.

Canopus Lim · Post by **Canopus Lim** » Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:58 am

Astrology is not equal to astronomy and vice versa. Astrology = fortune telling, Astronomy=science and appreciation. I think the only similarity is that the zodiac constellations are in order.. so Aquarius followed by Pisces ... etc according to which constellation rise first in the night.

neoterryjoe · Post by **neoterryjoe** » Tue Dec 06, 2005 10:24 am

Hi!
Just FYI, if anybody thinks there is a discrepancy, there is none. First constellation which rises in the night would be the same as the constellation which the sun is in in the day.

Aryanto · Post by **Aryanto** » Tue Dec 06, 2005 10:35 am

I went to some event in Science Center in Jurong and ask the same stupid question. When your star is in "season", the sun is in that star sign. What does that mean? It mean the opposite will shine brightly at night, as your sun will be in your star (and it is in the sky during the day and you cannot see it because of the sun). Have I confuse you so far? If not, good!

Post by **VinSnr** » Tue Dec 06, 2005 10:46 am

Only few people can see their own star signs during their Birthday.....

Happens only if there is a full solar eclipse during your bd!

chrisyeo · Post by **chrisyeo** » Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:04 pm

neoterryjoe wrote:Hi!
Just FYI, if anybody thinks there is a discrepancy, there is none. First constellation which rises in the night would be the same as the constellation which the sun is in in the day.

This doesn't sound right. The constellation (zodiac) that this sun is in will not be visible at all, and will not be the first constellation which rises at night. That constellation would be the 'opposite' star sign. Or did I understand you wrongly?

neoterryjoe · Post by **neoterryjoe** » Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:59 pm

Hi!

Hmmm...seems that i have visualised wrongly. Its the zodiac sign duration coincides with the constellation where the sun is in the day which is actually based on the position of constellations in pervious eras.
Quoting www.space.com:

If we could see the stars in the daytime, we would see the Sun slowly wander from one constellation of the Zodiac to the next, making one complete circle around the sky in one year.

Ancient astrologers were able to figure out where the Sun was on the Zodiac by noting which is the last constellation of the Zodiac to rise ahead of the Sun, or the first to set after it. Obviously, the Sun had to be somewhere in between. As such, each month a specific constellation was conferred the title of "House of the Sun," and in this manner each month-long period of the year was given its "sign of the Zodiac."

Interestingly, the "sign" which has been assigned for a given month in the horoscope that you'll find in your daily newspaper is not where the Sun actually is that particular month, but where it would have been thousands of years ago! This is due to the "wobble" of the Earth's axis (known as precession) which alters the direction in the sky to which the North Pole points, also changing over time the relative positions of all the stars. Yet today's astrologers, who believe that the Sun, Moon and planets mysteriously direct our lives, continue to adhere to star positions that for all intents and purposes are out of date by thousands of years.

Check out for more infomation:
http://www.space.com/spacewatch/ecliptic_030228.html

The zodiac sign does not coincide with the first constellation in the night.

neoterryjoe · Post by **neoterryjoe** » Tue Dec 06, 2005 4:33 pm

Hi!
Yes, yes.. I get you. No need to bold...