Last weekend I gave a talk on Solar Returns to the Mid-Hudson NCGR group in New York state. We had a lively discussion, and the meeting left me wondering about several aspects of solar returns which seemed worth investigating further. One of these was the issue of when the sun *in reality* completes a full annual cycle. This post will explore that topic in more depth.

In the scientific world, we view the Earth as revolving around the Sun. According to Kepler’s model, the two celestial bodies actually revolve around each other in a giant elliptical pattern that approximates a circle.

The scientific preference is to view this elliptical orbit from the point of view of the Sun, but astrologers on Earth prefer to view matters from their vantage point on Earth because it accords with their day-to-day experience. Thus, astrologers construct their charts with the Earth at the center and speak of the Sun revolving around the Earth. Obviously, astrologers are aware of the scientific model and accept Kepler’s first law that the planets travel around the Sun in elliptical (but nearly circular) orbits with the center of the Sun as one of the foci of the ellipse.

In any case, whether we adopt the frame of reference of the Sun revolving around the Earth, or the Earth revolving around the Sun, the question remains: how long is a year? We measure our lives in years, by which we mean the amount of time it takes, speaking geocentrically, for the Sun to reach the same point in its orbit around the Earth that it traversed at the moment of our birth — the so-called Solar Return — and we all hope to have many happy Returns.

You might think it’s an easy matter to measure a year, but in reality it turns out to be quite a complicated matter. First, there is the issue of what reference system (*tropical* or *sidereal*) we will use to measure the solar year.

Do we choose to measure movement in the solar system against the backdrop of the fixed stars, that is, using the *sidereal zodiac*? In the short term this system is fairly reliable, but in the long term the positions of the fixed stars are changing due to the expansion of the universe and the revolution of our solar system around the center of the Milky Way galaxy in which we reside.

Is the *tropical zodiac* any more reliable as a reference system for measuring the length of the year? Probably not. As you probably know, the tropical zodiac begins its measurement of 0 Aries at the spring equinox, that is, at the exact moment when the path of the Sun crosses the Earth’s equator (which is what gives us equal amounts of daylight and night, at the “equi-nox” or equal night). Scientists have measured the mean or average tropical year very precisely and found that it has a length of 365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes, and 46 seconds, or 365.242189 days.

The problem is that, like the Moon’s Nodes, there are two types of tropical years: mean years and true years. It seems that reality does not precisely follow the abstract mathematical model. One issue it that the Earth wobbles on its axis (*precession*), like a spinning top, so that the Earth’s axis makes a complete circle about every 26,000 years. That may seem like a long time but the practical effect is that the Earth wobbles a teeny bit every year, enough so that the Earth’s Equator shifts a tiny bit, causing about a 20 minute difference in the exact moment of the spring equinox (used to measure 0 Aries) every year.

**The Earth’s wobble affects the start of the tropical zodiac**

In an article about this topic, Sarah Kaplan explains that “the consequence of all this wobbling is that ** a tropical year ends about 20 minutes before Earth actually completes an orbit of the sun**.” The effect is that at the moment the Sun completes one tropical year to return to its birth location, the start of Aries has gradually shifted backward by 20 minutes (as measured against the fixed stars) so that the reference system used to measure the sun’s motion has changed. To correct for this ongoing change in the reference system, some astrologers prefer to use “precession-corrected” solar returns, which adjust the return for the 20-minute annual change in the position of 0 Aries in the tropical zodiac.

An analogy might be helpful here. Suppose you enter a 100-meter race. The Start Line is marked “0 meters” and the Finish Line, “100 meters.” During the race, the referee decides to move the start line backward so that it is one meter earlier than its original position. When you have run 100 meters in the original system, the distance measured from the new Start Line indicates that you have run 101 meters because it has undergone a form of precession. This is what happens with solar returns; at the moment the sun (or earth) completes one full orbit, the start line of the tropical zodiac (0 Aries) has shifted backward a tiny bit and you are 20 minutes into a new tropical year.

**Planetary gravity alters the space-time continuum within our solar system**

Another issue is that the orbiting planets all exert gravitational effects on the sun and on the other planets of the solar system, thus, as Einstein explained, distorting the space-time continuum in which we live. As a result, the duration of the planetary orbits varies slightly from one cycle to the next. In fact, even though the *mean *tropical year has been measured carefully to be 365.242189 days long (** 365 days, 5 hours, 48 minute, 45 seconds**), the exact length of a

*true*tropical year can vary up to 30 minutes from this figure. For astrologers, this means that the exact moment of your solar return, as measured by the mean or average tropical solar year, may in reality be as much as 30 minutes earlier or later, depending on the gravitational patterns of the other planets in the solar system for the year in question.

If you are interested in how long your *true tropical year* is for any date between 1900 and the year 2100, fortunately there is a table that gives this data at https://www.timeanddate.com/astronomy/tropicalyearlength.html.

Here is an excerpt from a table of the length of true tropical years for the current period. This table is based on the definition that “the length of a tropical year is the time it takes the Earth to complete a full orbit around the Sun, but it varies from year to year.”

March 2016 – March 2017 | 365 days |
5 hours |
58 minutes |
36 seconds |
---|---|---|---|---|

March 2017 – March 2018 | 365 | 5 | 46 | 41 |

March 2018 – March 2019 | 365 | 5 | 43 | 12 |

March 2019 – March 2020 | 365 | 5 | 51 | 4 |

March 2020 – March 2021 | 365 | 5 | 47 | 55 |

I don’t know if astrological software adjusts for these differences in the length of the *true tropical year* from one year to the next. If not, we may have to be content with computer programs that use the mean tropical year and give average solar returns which may be off by a full 30 minutes from the true return of the sun to its birth location. This variability in the length of the tropical year would also affect many predictive measure that we use in astrology (progressions, directions, etc., especially those for which 4 minutes = 1 degree = 1 year of life). In some cases a 30-minute difference can radically alter the solar return chart by changing the Angles and house cusps which are essential to interpretation, so the next time your solar return interpretations completely miss the mark, you can blame the distortion of the space-time continuum by the other planets in our solar system.

**ADDENDUM & CORRECTION** (21 August 2018):

I am grateful to ** Bernd **who wrote in response to the original post (see comments section below):

“

*Today tropical solar return calculation is done with computers using a simple formula:*

*Birthtime + Mean Tropical Year * X = Approximal Solar Return Time*

*After that a loop is done until the Exact Solar Return Time is found:*

*Approximal Solar Return Time +- Minutes / Seconds = Exact Solar Return Time*

*Where Exact Solar Return Time is the time the Sun reaches the same exact place on the ecliptic as it was at time of birth.*

*So there’s no need to know the exact Tropical Year length*.”

According to Bernd, our astrological software does adjust for the variable length of the true tropical year to locate the sun each year at the same point on its path which it occupied in the birth chart. Thus, we don’t need to concern ourselves with variable-length tropical years when we use our computers to calculate the solar return.

I assume, however, that the position of the sun’s return is measured in the tropical zodiac so that there still remains the issue of correcting for precession because the start of the tropical zodiac is constantly shifting backward as the tilt of the Earth’s axis is constantly changing with respect to the Sun.

Hi Anthony,

I think this article sets a tone for a reflection about Astrology and how we see it as a system.

Is it static, purely mathematical, which is operating average values for calculation of planetary placements and predictions based on that? Or is it dynamic and flexible, meaning that it takes into account precession and the true tropical year? Ultimately, this is a question about HOW astrology works and this can only be resolved by observation, comparing and data research.

As for solar returns, so far, I find it to be the least reliable technique in prediction work. I’ve seen some charts work with “normal” solar returns (tropical and mean values), but I have also seen very convincing examples of precessed solar returns. And I don’t like to have this dilemma in Astrology!

Another point of ambiguity with this technique, is timing. How do you time it? 1 sign equals 1 month? Do you progress the Ascendant? Do you track transits activating the chart?

There are also fancy methods out there based on 9th harmonic (called “enneads” by James Eshelman in his book), which divide the chart into segments of 40˚ that mark a “chapter” in the native’s annual life. I’m currently observing my enneads and I can confirm that there is indeed a change of scene once the Sun hits these degrees.

I have one software in mind that might have true tropical year adjustments. I will contact them and will let you know asap.

What is your experience with Solar returns? Which approach do you use? Did you find it valuable?

Catherine

Hi Catherine,

I do find solar returns valuable but only in the context of the natal chart and other predictive techniques. If they are used in isolation, they can be very misleading. I wrote a book on returns which was published in 2008. For a good treatment of traditional methods, I recommend Ben Dykes translation of Abu Ma’Shar On Solar Revolutions.

Regarding timing, there are many methods and I prefer the simpler ones. I find that secondary progressing the solar return with the Angles being directed at the mean quotidian rate produces good results. Any transits in the return chart that will perfect within 24 hours after the return usually stand out during the year.

Tony

Hi Anthony,

You use tropical zodiac and non-precessed returns?

Thanks for the books suggestion!

I use the tropical zodiac and look at both the non-precessed and the precessed returns for both the birthplace and the actual location of the return.

How do you decide which one is the most relevant one? They differences can be pretty significant…

They are both relevant, but from different points of view.

Today tropical solar return calculation is done with computers using a simple formula:

Birthtime + Mean Tropical Year * X = Approximal Solar Return Time

After that a loop is done until the Exact Solar Return Time is found:

Approximal Solar Return Time +- Minutes / Seconds = Exact Solar Return Time

Where Exact Solar Return Time is the time the Sun reaches the same exact place on the ecliptic as it was at time of birth.

So there’s no need to know the exact Tropical Year lenght.

Thank you, Bernd, for that clarification. It’s very useful informaton.

Tony

The DOS program RIYAL is recommended by astrologers for its precision, including the tropical year corrrections.

Thanks, Catherine. I didn’t know about RIYAL. My guess is that most programs make tropical year corrections as Bernd comments in his post here.

Computer calculation of ‘precession correted solar returns’ is done the same as ‘tropical solar returns’ are done. The only difference is that the sideral zodiac is used:

1. Calculate the sidereal sun ecliptical position for the time of birth

2. Birthtime + Mean Sidereal Year * X = Approximal Sidereal Solar Return Time

After that a loop is done until the Exact Sidereal Solar Return Time is found:

Approx. Sidereal Solar Return Time +- Minutes / Seconds = Exact Sidereal Solar Return Time

Where the Exact Sidereal Solar Return Time is the time the sidereal Sun reaches the same exact sidereal position on the ecliptic (see point 1) as it was at time of birth.

So there’s no need to know the exact Sideral Year lenght (365.25636 days) either. You can just use the Mean Calendar Year lenght (365.25 days) or it even works using 365 days.

Hi Bernd,

You imply that all software out there uses these formulas to calculate solar returns?

Thanks!

Hi Catherine,

no I don’t know if all astrology software out there uses my formula. Because exspecially the commercial ones are not open source. So I can’t look into them.

The formula I showed is just the way I calculate solar returns using computer programming. And the results I get are matching exact the results common commercial astrology application provide.

Furthermore for a computer programmer the problem to calculate solar returns is so trivial that I can’t think of another formula that is 100% exact and also so simple to compute.

One can calculate my formula also manually by hand using a printed ephemeris. But because the formula requires looping it’s repetitive, time-consuming and tiring. Fortunately we have computers for this kind of tasks today.

Hi Bernd,

Fantastic! For example, do your results match Astrodienst solar returns? I would like to test my software and compare it to an accurate source (I use Sirius 2.0).

Thanks a lot for the info!

Hi Catherine,

if you try to really understand my simple solar return formula you will be aware that the results are exact to whatever precision you like – even to a million of an arc second or even more.

Look it’s really easy to find how exact a solar return calculation is. Just compare the position of the sun of the solar return chart with the position of the sun of your birth chart. Their ecliptic positions should be exact the same down to arc seconds. If they are the same the solar return chart will be exact also.

And yes sure my formula will give the exact same results as astro.com solar return charts. Of course they do have also exact the same Asc and Moon positions and so forth.

Hi Bernd,

You are absolutely right. The formula is pretty simple and the results match perfectly the astro.com as well. Thanks a lot!

Addendum to my post from August 22, 2018 at 8:00 PM

Computer calculation of ‘precession correted solar returns’:

The resulting ‘Exact Sidereal Solar Return Time’ is finally used to calculate the ‘Tropical Solar Return Chart (which is now precession corrected).

Hi Anthony,

It seems in some degree this issue with the Sun position is similar as choosing either True Nodes or Mean Nodes. In your experience which one you find more accurate, True Nodes or Mean Nodes?

Thank you

Ray

That is a vexing question because in some charts the true nodes seems more informative and in others, the mean nodes seem more helpful. In solar returns I have taken to using the true nodes because when they are stationary in a solar return the year is usually quite intense with significant changes in the life of the native.