Psh. So some people get to be all special and have a new sign? Pox on that!

Besides I'm an Aquarian through and through.

Why do people finally decide to put in the Ophiuchus when it's always been there in the sky? :|a

Some people in Taiwan included the Ophiuchus. It's somewhat of a healer constellation, in reference to the Greek physician who was killed by Zeus because he found the key to immortality.

I could be wrong. There can be other variations to the snake star.

Well my old sign, Virgo,  was only halfway true about my personality anyway.  If we're going by personality traits I should be a Pisces.

I would be switched to Ophiuchus. Given that Sagittarius has never suited me at all, I wouldn't mind. ^_-

On the other hand, Paradox would change from a Virgo to a Leo, and Virgo suits him far too well.

Darn it! I don't wanna be a Virgo... I wanna stay a Libra.. I liked being an inanimate object..

Not only that, but I seemed more like a mix between a Virgo and a Libra...

winksniper wrote:

I'd be moved to Virgo too.  I'm a Libran through and through, though, I fit the traits oh so well...

Yeah, I'm gonna ignore this because it really only matters for when you were born.

How do you figure that out?

Saito Hoshikawa wrote:

winksniper wrote:

I'd be moved to Virgo too.  I'm a Libran through and through, though, I fit the traits oh so well...

Yeah, I'm gonna ignore this because it really only matters for when you were born.

How do you figure that out?

Well you're usually told when you're born by your parents, but you can always check your birth certificate if you're unsure.

Sorry I'll stop being facetious now. Apparently the old zodiac was based on miscalculations on the Earth's rotation. Others say that the old zodiac will stay because astrologists really aren't liking the idea. I don't know, I've heard a ton of things and none of it seems very solid.

WHAT IS THIS I DONT EVEN.

SINCE WHEN AM I A GEMINI? LIES.

EDIT: Apparently these are only effective if you were born after 2009. Misleading article is misleading and the person who wrote it should be karate-chopped in the head with great strength.

Last edited by Azure (01-14-2011 10:33:20 PM)

Yeah, I am totally an Aquarius no matter what they say.

Like_Autumn wrote:

CNN had an article that it doesn't change for the Western zodiac because they're based on the seasons, not actual star alignment. So the signs aren't actually changing.

This is the real story, right here. 

But we can always get more detailed   There are basically two schools of thought about how the zodiac should work.  The first is called sidereal astrology, and its idea is dead simple: at the moment you're born, what constellation is the Sun actually situated in?  That constellation, says sidereal astrology, is your sign.  Very easy to understand, and it works the same way for all the other planets.  The problem is that over centuries, the path of the Sun through the sky during the course of the year shifts.  The Sun might have been in Gemini on June 17 in the time of the old Greeks, but these days the Sun is in Taurus on June 17.  That means that in order for sidereal astrology to work, you have to be willing to put up with a shifting relationship of dates to signs, and traditionally in the West we aren't down with that.  We want the signs to stay put.

The second school of thought gives us exactly that.  It's called tropical astrology, and it works -- as Like_Autumn nicely summarizes -- through the seasons.  The equinoxes and solstices that mark the change of seasons are always at the same time of year no matter how many centuries pass, so we fix the tropical zodiac signs around those dates.  That way the calendar of dates and signs doesn't mutate: once a Virgo, always a Virgo.  This also gives us the liberty to make all the signs equally long, even though the Sun doesn't actually take equally long to pass through each of them.  The downside is that the signs in the tropical system are disconnected from what's actually going on in the sky.  A tropical astrologer (which is most of them, in the West) will tell you that your newborn baby's Mars is in Pisces, when you can look up and clearly see for yourself that it's in Aquarius.

So this news article is about the sidereal system, and it disorients us because what we've been taught is the tropical system.  It turns out that the Sun's path has changed a lot over the two-thousand-odd years since the signs were laid down.  The Sun passes through a thirteenth constellation, Ophiuchus, in addition to the old twelve, and it only hits Scorpio for a few days a year anymore.  None of that changes how most astrologers practice astrology, since the whole point of tropical astrology is that what matters are the constant and reliable seasons and not the messy and changing paths of planets through the sky.

What is your actual sign?  Well, if by that you mean "Where was my Sun, physically in the sky, when I was born?", then you want to ask a sidereal astrologer, or consult the table in the news article.  If you mean "How was my Sun situated with respect to the seasons when I was born?", then you don't have to relearn anything: what you've always been taught is correct.  Since astrology does not actually have any bearing on events on Earth, it doesn't much matter which way you choose. 

Last edited by satyreyes (01-14-2011 11:12:59 PM)

We aim to please.    It's nice when knowing random trivia actually lets me make myself useful!

I simply refuse to be an Aquarius . I am the most stubborn one, the Capricorn. I'll die to defend this FACT.