Talk:Ascendant

Untitled

Please someone change the interwiki link [[pl:Ascendent]] to [[pl:Ascendent (rodzina)]], because currently the first links to astrology not genealogy. Thanks.

(edited by http://pl.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedysta:Rozek19)

Calculation

The provided formula is questionable. What does "a" in "cos a" stand for? Is it the same as "A" in "sin A"? What is the argument of the atan function? Why is it written as "atan-..." ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.106.121.55 (talk) 09:17, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This has been dealt with. Some knowledge of trigonometry is assumed. Michaelbarreto (talk) 07:16, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not only that. That formula actually gives only results in range -90° to 90°, which is only a half of the full zodiac. It hasn't been said, how to determine when 180° should be added to the result and when not. 本 Mihajlo ^{_[ talk _]} 10:31, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To get the correct quadrant for this calculation one would use atan2. Michaelbarreto (talk) 06:30, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you can always put it right in the section and reference its proper usage. And please firstly then remove the template telling not everything is fine in that section. Presently we only have a formula that is supposed to work fine (I could find at least two more references for such formulas) but obviously not working for half of the zodiac. 本 Mihajlo ^{_[ talk _]} 03:08, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The formula does work, as I have already said; use atan2 to get the result in the correct quadrant (i.e. 360° or the full zodiac). Perhaps you should include the alternative formulae? This formula is from a respected astronomical book. Michaelbarreto (talk) 04:02, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Respected or not, that won't make atan give anything out of its range -90° to 90°. It just needs further workon and referencing. And, come on, this is not about what we know. This is about how to write that small section properly. (oh, well, a hard task without a book that defines this well) 本 Mihajlo ^{_[ talk _]} 20:00, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the third time: Use atan2 to get the answer in the correct quadrant, i.e. the full Zodiac. Please click on this link and have a look at the page on atan2. Michaelbarreto (talk) 04:02, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A manual IF THEN manipulation for determining the correct quadrant has been inserted. Martin Lewicki (talk) 04:39, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought "Wikipedia is an encyclopedic reference, not an instruction manual, guidebook, or textbook". Michaelbarreto (talk) 06:18, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is not Wikipedia's fault that some books contain inconsistent stuff that has no way of working when applied directly (shame on the respected book). To the point, completing the incomplete information that was published before doesn't make WP more a manual than it was before. It just makes it better. 本 Mihajlo ^{_[ talk _]} 14:59, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the meaning of Ascendant

hey, i think a good, simple definition of the Ascendant is the popular expression "the dough you are made of ".... what do you think ?81.44.21.123 (talk) 16:01, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ascendant

Hi, I'd like to know my ascendant. If someone can help me... I was born June 6th 1974, at 7pm. Thank you very much, Héloïse Lamirault-Oppelt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.205.35.237 (talk) 01:11, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ascendant is optical fake

The movement of the Earth in orbit around the Sun does not depend on the location on the Earth's surface. This means that the intersection of the horizon and ecliptic planes can be considered as an optical phenomenon, like the intersection of the silhouette of the Eiffel tower with the Milky Way belt, visible in the sky in clear weather. 85.249.45.182 (talk) 16:36, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]