The working of the so-called astrological directions is one of the most difficult propositions that astrology offers to the modern human mind. Many of our contemporaries find it questionable enough even to consider the possibility of impacts of stars and planets on the Earth and its inhabitants, apart from the acknowledgement of mere gravitational and nuclear influences. However, the idea that cosmic happenings coinciding with the birth of a human being, for instance, should become effective possibly decades later is likely to be highly foreign to a modern mind. Of course, such interrelationships can be comprehended on the basis of an occult conception of the universe and human beings, but occultism itself seems to be a stepchild of our age. The question is whether these problems cannot be resolved on a strictly “scientific” basis. Our impression is that it can be done to the extent to which we acquire a clear insight into the nature of the relationship between matter and so-called energy. With regard to the latter, humanity seems to stand anyhow at the threshold of great surprises. We should like to present in our exposition, findings as the result of investigations that have been carried out by the Landvidi Research Centre for some years. They concern the co-relation between such terrestrial happenings as earthquakes, storms, but also certain historic developments and cosmic coincidences prior to their reflection on Earth. We have thereby come to the conclusion that the so-called aspects between planets, etc., can be delayed with regard to their effect. The investigations were carried out on the basis of the heliocentric approach. (This approach has been partly described in the author’s Drama of the Universe, published by The Landvidi Research Centre, Larkfield, Kent, England, 1958.) One reason for this was the evidence that the rotation of the Sun; [it] was a decisive factor with regard to the conservation, and therefore the delay of the effects, of cosmic events. The following example will explain this. On November 18, 1956, a conjunction of Pluto and Venus occurred, from the heliocentric viewpoint, corresponding to c. 150° of the Earth’s ecliptic. This was accompanied by a conjunction of Saturn and Mercury in c. 245°, nearly at a right angle, or a square aspect. On March 23, 1957, 125 days later, San Francisco was shaken by relatively strong earthquakes. Thus the event suggested that a connection existed between the events on November 18, 1956 and the return of the impression of the conjunction with Pluto on the Sun’s surface to the corresponding area. It is well-known that the actual rotation period of the Sun is, near its equator, 25.03 days. Although at higher latitudes it is longer — up to 27.37 days at 40° Northern or Southern latitude. (See H. W. Newton, The Face of the Sun, Penguin Books, 1958.) Those 125 days between November 18, 1956 and March 23, 1957, correspond to 4+ rotations of the Sun. The explanation seems to be that any such conjunction creates an indentation or “wound” in the finer layers of the Sun’s surface. The latter might extend much further out into cosmic space than the actually visible layers such as the Photosphere, Chromosphere and Corona. The so-called Zodiacal Light might be a confirmation of this idea. Those indentations in the layers of the Sun would then return in intervals of c. 25 days to the coordinates of the slower moving planets, which would be Pluto in the present case. One can imagine that they cause irritation on the Sun and in turn affect the whole solar system. The question is whether these “impressions” are actually responsible, at least to a certain extent, for such occurrences as earthquakes, such as the one at San Francisco, March 22-3, 1957? Further investigations produced evidence that this is a strong possibility. On April 17th, 25 days later, the original indentation area would have returned again into line with Pluto. The day before, April 16th, a conjunction took place between Pluto and Mercury. Therefore the indentation area of this event has been only about l4° longitude to the West on the Sun’s surface, which might have been an additional irritation of the old “wound”. In any case, following another three rotations of the Sun (3 x 25.03 = 75 days) brought us to July 1st. During the next few days a number of powerful earthquake shocks occurred in Persia. They were accompanied by a heliocentric conjunction of Pluto and Venus on July 2, 1957. The interesting fact is that after another 6 rotations (150 plus 5 days), that is, December 3, 1957, a heliocentric opposition of Mercury to Pluto took place. We can imagine that these repeated angular relationships to Pluto, coinciding with the return of the indentation area on the Sun, from the November 18, 1956 contact, caused increasing deepening of the original wound. The repercussion, as far as the Earth was concerned, was prompt: On December 4th a giant earthquake happened in Siberia, of which the Russians claimed fantastic changes and devastations of the landscape that were hit. The time-lag of about 6 days between July 1st and December 4th may have been due to a shifting of the indentation-area into the Northern or Southern latitude of the Sun, which causes the strange phenomenon of “slowed down” rotation. Why should conjunctions or oppositions of planets cause “wounds” on the Sun? One possible answer is the following: planets are points of consolidation and condensation. The layers of the Sun are obviously spheres of disintegration of a magnitude that far supersedes anything of similar nature on the Earth. Therefore, it is possible to think that the combined impacts of two or more planets might be piled into the layers of the Sun, because the two cosmic elements of planets and Sun seem to be diametrical opposites. In any case, it has been found, by the investigation of a substantial number of earthquakes, that the described delay of effect of heliocentric planetary aspects always accompanies such occurrences. It is possible to think that these wounds continue to “hurt” even if they are not directed toward the slow-moving planet which caused them originally. The example of a series of six great earthquakes in Calabria between February 5th and March 28, 1783, demonstrated this. The heliocentric planetary correlations were as follows: First earthquake:   February 5, 1783, minus 150 days = September 8, 1782: Venus conj. Uranus (96°) opp. Saturn conj. Jupiter (271°) minus 128 days = September 30  : Venus (130°) opposite Pluto (310°) In both case the corresponding areas of impression returned by the rotation of the Sun into line with Uranus and then Pluto, on February 5th , March 2nd, and March 27th. Important to note is the return of the indentation areas coinciding with the first and the last of the series of earthquakes. Other interesting sequences of delayed effect of this nature were:   18 April 1906: Earthquake of San Francisco minus 124 days = 15 December 1905: Mercury conj. Pluto (82°) conj. Earth (84°) minus 102 days = 6 January 1906      : Venus (262°) opp. Pluto (82°) 28 December 1908 : Earthquake of Messina minus 74 days = 15 October 1908: Venus conj. Pluto (85°) minus 175 days = 6 July 1908       : Merc. conj. Ven. conj. Uranus (284°) opp. Neptune (104.6°) 27 August 1883: Eruption of Krakatoa minus 127 days = 22 April 1883: Mercury conj. Pluto (60°) conj. Saturn (58.3°) 1                                                  November 1755: Earthquake of Lisbon minus 176 days = 9 May 1755: Mercury (309°) opp. Neptune (129°) minus 201 days = 14 April 1755: Venus conj. Pluto c. 258°   Naturally, one would expect similar repercussions in other spheres of the Earth as well. This can be proven. During the last days of January 1953, a storm which combined with a springtide brought tremendous devastation to the coast along the Eastern flank of England and the coast of Holland. Apart from simultaneous heliocentric aspects (described in the author’s Drama of the Universe) these events were accompanied by the following delayed-effect impacts:   a.  30 August 1952  Venus conj. Neptune c. 201°   plus 153 days \ b.  22 October 1952            Venus (286°) opp. Uranus (106°)        plus 100 days =           30 January 1953 c.  14 November 1952        Venus (322°) opp. Pluto (142°)           plus 77 days /   The interesting fact here is that all the earlier happenings were associated with Venus. Furthermore, all three of the outermost planets were involved. The entanglement of Venus in these kinds of meteorological upheavals appears to be common as investigations have shown. On November 26-27, 1703 (0.S.) the so-called “Great Storm” devastated the coasts of England and Holland. It was a nature event that was, also with regard to the simultaneous heliocentric accompaniments, strikingly similar to 1953. Earlier cosmic coincidences, according to heliocentric co-ordination were:   1 April 1703: Mercury (227°) opp. Venus (47°) – near nodal line of Mercury, plus 250 days =26-27 November (0.S.) Saturn conj. Neptune (c.12°) opp. Earth (191°) 12 November 1703: Venus conj. Jupiter (c.47°) conj. Nodal line of Mercury, plus 25 days =7-8 December 1703 (N.S) Other coincidences of a similar kind from a collection of data were:   2  June 1864: Venus conj. Pluto c. 42-43° – plus 125 days = 5 October 1864 and the Cyclone at Calcutta (near the nodal line of Mercury) 13 February 1872: Venus (229.5°) opp. Pluto (49.5°) – plus 77 days = 1 May 1872 Cyclone near Madras (near the nodal line of Mercury) Conspicuous is the association of Venus with the Nodal line of Mercury, which is the line that is determined by the nodes of the latter’s orbit with the ecliptic plain of the Earth. (These nodes of the planets seem to be rather an integral part of heliocentric astrology.) Why is Venus predominantly involved in these occurrences (see 1953)? The answer is not easy since we have comparatively little data concerning the impact of this planet on nature; but experience in another field might at least point out the road toward an answer. Venus obviously plays into the world of human feeling, as innumerable astrological investigations have shown. Feeling is, in a sense, a meteorological sphere, because we meet the tempests of passion there, as well as the calm occasions of joy and contentment. From this point of view it seems obvious that we must expect the untamed equivalents in nature to also be caused by the impacts of Venus. Do these kinds of meteorological disturbances affect, for instance, aeronautics? We have a striking example which confirms the possibility of such an influence. During the week August 9 - 15, 1958, seven airplane crashes occurred in different parts of the world with the loss of over 200 lives. The heliocentric events at the time are interesting but not overwhelming. However, the delayed-effect impacts should leave no doubts:   August 9–15, 1958: Heliocentric minus 25 days = July 15–21 15 July: Mercury conj. (213.5°) Jupiter conj. Neptune (213.8°) 20 July: Jupiter conj. Neptune (213.8°) minus 50 days = June 20–26 26 June: Mercury conj. Uranus conj. nodal line of Neptune (131.4°) minus 75 days = May 26–June 1 28 May: Mercury opp. Pluto (c.151.5°) 1 June: Mars (311.1°) opp. Uranus (131.1°)   This leads us to the question of whether human life is also affected by these delayed-effect impacts coming from the Sun. The fact is that they are discernable in big historic events. Here are some striking examples: June 28, 1914: minus 50 days (2 rotations of the indentation-area of Sun returning to Uranus) = May 9, 1914: Jupiter conj. Uranus c. 309° and near the nodal line of Neptune, when the Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria was murdered at Serajevo, which was the beginning of the First World War. November 7, 1917: minus 50 days = September 18, 1917: Mars conj. Pluto in c. 94° “October”-Revolution of Bolshevics in Russia January 30, 1933: minus 75 days = November 16, 1932: Mars conj. Pluto in c. 113° National-Socialists in Power in Germany   The delayed-effect dynamics in all three cases appear to be obvious but the demonstration of the effect of the conjunction of Mars with Pluto is remarkable. Once the connection was discovered it seemed impossible to expect anything else in view of the background of the two revolutions. We have the suspicion that this kind of indentation in the layers of the Sun is ultimately responsible for the Sun-spots. However, we have not nearly enough evidence yet to confirm this because the necessary calculations involve rather intricate problems. Therefore we regard what we say here about this matter only as a tentative suggestion. The first half of 1947 brought an extraordinary Sun-spot, one of the biggest in the history of modern astronomy. It was observed and investigated during four disk passages. The first observation was made between February 4–17. The spot was on the central meridian, seen from the Earth, on February 11, in about 22° southern latitude of the Sun. (See H. W. Newton’s The Face of the Sun.) On May 24, 1946, 263 days earlier, the planet Venus was heliocentrically in conjunction with Pluto (c. 131°) and not far from Saturn (c. 117°). This 263 days would correspond to about 10 rotations of the impression-area of this conjunction in the layers of the Sun and its return into line with Pluto. Considering the latitude of the later Sun-spot, we assumed rotation-cycles of c. 26 days, to which we added the time that the area would need to move from Pluto into line with the Earth. Some time later, on September 7, 1946, Venus (301°) was in opposition to Saturn (c. 121°), which was about 10 ecliptic degrees away from Pluto (c. 131°). From September 7, 1946, to February 11, 1947, we count 157 days, which would correspond to 6 rotations of the impression-area on the Sun (6 x 26 days) plus 1 day for moving into line with the Earth, which was in about 142° on February 11. We ask ourselves whether the Sun-spot of 1947 was not the final result of those earlier impressions on the layers of the Sun. It is conceivable that Sun-spots are the visible “scars” of the “wounds” that the Sun might have received earlier. However, we are not yet in a position to give a final answer, although this might be a possible avenue of approach to the problem. These discoveries appear to open totally new vistas with regard to the factual relationship between the cosmos and the Earth with its inhabitants. One can not yet conceive where this will lead to. There might still be a number of hidden surprises. However, developments and investigations like these described here and others might in time take the sting out of those old accusations against astrology — that its tenets are chiefly the heritage of superstitions handed down from bygone ages by an ignorant humanity. © 2012 Astrosophy Research Center ‒ ISBN 1-888686-13-8 All rights reserved. These Articles are for private use, study, and research only and are not to be reprinted for any other purpose without the written permission of the Astrosophy Research Center.