Why should we? Perhaps because astronomers keep telling the world that 'their' constellations are not the same as the astrological signs? Perhaps because the names of the sunsigns are confusing? *) Perhaps because the recent sunsign and Ophiocus-hype caused astrologers to explain themselves and the names of the sunsigns?
Why should we NOT change the names of the sunsigns? Maybe because we have a tropic of Cancer and a tropic of Capricorn on earth in geography? Maybe because we are used to the names? Maybe because it were astrologers-astronomers who gave the signs their names?
Well, the hype has gone and the signs are still were they are, in astronomy and in astrology. Time for the next poll. Thanks for your input!
*) Wiki about the tropic of cancer
The imaginary line is called the Tropic of Cancer because when it was named, the Sun was in the direction of the constellation Cancer (Latin for crab) at the June solstice. However, this is no longer true due to the precession of the equinoxes. According to International Astronomical Union boundaries, the Sun now is in Taurus at the June solstice. According tosidereal astrology, which divides the zodiac into 12 equal parts, the Sun is in Gemini at that time. The word "tropic" itself comes from the Greek τροπή (tropi), meaning turn, referring to the fact that the Sun appears to "turn back" at the solstices.
The June solstice has still the astrological Sun in Cancer, however. Now we have three signs: Taurus (Astronomy), Gemini (Sidereal) and Cancer (Tropical). And the Sun is still high at June 21, the longest day of sunlight in the Northern hemisphere, just like when the names of the signs were given...
Confusing enough?:) If not, use the label 'zodiac' for more about the recent hype.
Also visit: Astromarkt.net
Post a Comment