The DG Theory

Draconic Galactic: Soul, Origin, and the Cycle of Time

Written by Daniela Ghazalian. Published August 12, 2026 by The Line Inc..

Abstract

The Draconic Galactic (DG) Theory proposes an astrological framework for investigating a specific ontological question: whether astrology may contain a coordinate system capable of pointing toward the soul at the beginning of its existence, prior to its entry into the cycle of time. The theory is developed within a theistic framework in which God is understood as the Creator of the Universe, while drawing philosophical context from traditions that have long considered the soul as existing beyond a single embodied lifetime.

The method brings together two references. The first is Draconic Astrology, which orients the chart through the lunar nodal axis and is commonly interpreted as a soul chart. The second is a fixed Galactic Mid-Mula reference defined within the DG Theory at 6°40′ Sagittarius, or 246°40′ absolute zodiacal longitude, and associated with root and origin.

The transformation is sequential. The Draconic rotation is calculated first, then the fixed Galactic Mid-Mula rotation is applied. This produces a universal nodal axis at 23°20′ Cancer–Capricorn while preserving individualized planetary and object positions.

The DG Theory does not present this transformation as proof of the soul's nature or origin. It proposes a symbolic coordinate framework whose interpretation remains hypothetical and subject to continued research.

01 — THE QUESTION

Astrology has long been used to ask questions about destiny, purpose, fate, and the soul. The Draconic Galactic (DG) Theory begins with a question that reaches further back: if the soul is created before it enters the cycle of time, could astrology contain a coordinate system capable of pointing toward that original state?

The question depends on a distinction between creation and experience. Once the soul enters an incarnational cycle, it acquires history: relationships, choices, consequences, and the karma carried from one incarnation into another. What the soul becomes through that history is not necessarily identical to what it was at its beginning.

The DG Theory asks whether astrology can look beyond that accumulated experience toward the soul at the point of its original creation. It investigates what happens when two ideas — soul and origin — are brought together within a symbolic coordinate system.

The resulting chart is not presented as proof of the soul's origin or creation. Rather, the theory asks whether this transformation may provide a meaningful symbolic framework through which the soul at the beginning of its existence can be explored.

02 — ONTOLOGICAL CONTEXT — THE SOUL BEFORE THE CYCLE OF TIME

The possibility that human existence does not begin with the present body has been explored for centuries through philosophical, ontological, and theological inquiry, particularly through questions of whether the soul precedes embodied life, survives it, or moves through a history larger than one lifetime.

The DG Theory begins from a theistic ontology in which God is understood as Creator of the Universe and, therefore, as the source of all that exists within creation, including the soul. From this premise, the theory considers whether the soul first exists in its created state before entering the cycle of time through temporal existence.

Questions about the soul's existence before the present life appear explicitly in ancient Greek philosophy. The Pythagorean tradition taught Metempsychosis: the transmigration of the soul through successive lives.¹ Empedocles also described existence across multiple embodied forms through the journey of the daimōn.² Although their accounts differ, both place the beginning and continuity of existence beyond the boundaries of a single embodied life.

Plato explored the soul's existence before birth across several works. In the Meno, his theory of recollection suggests that the soul possessed knowledge before its present life.³ In the Phaedo, he directly considers the soul's existence before birth,⁴ while the Phaedrus describes the soul before embodiment.⁵ In the Republic's Myth of Er, souls exist between lives before returning to embodied existence.⁶ Together, these works present the soul as having an existence that extends beyond a single lifetime.

Plotinus later turned more directly to the question of origin. In his Neoplatonic philosophy, Soul ultimately proceeds from the One, the source from which existence emerges.⁷ His understanding of creation differs from the theistic framework of the DG Theory, but his work introduces an important distinction for this research: the difference between the soul's origin and what it becomes through its subsequent existence.

Questions about the soul beyond a single lifetime also appear across many other philosophical and religious traditions. Upaniṣadic and later Hindu philosophies developed accounts of the self, rebirth, saṃsāra, and liberation.⁸ Later Jewish traditions explored the soul's relationship to God and the possibility of transmigration across successive lives.⁹ Within Islamic philosophy, Ibn Sīnā described the human soul as immaterial and capable of existing beyond the death of the body.¹⁰

These traditions differ significantly in how they understand God, the soul, creation, embodiment, and rebirth. They are not presented here as one shared doctrine, but as evidence of a much older and wider inquiry into whether the soul's existence extends beyond a single embodied life.

The DG Theory approaches this question through astrology, while making a more specific proposition of its own: that the soul is created by God, and that its original created state may be distinct from what it becomes after entering the cycle of time.

03 — THE DRACONIC REFERENCE — SOUL

If the DG Theory is asking whether astrology can point toward the soul before accumulated experience begins, it first needs a coordinate system already associated with the soul. That is the role of Draconic Astrology.

Draconic Astrology is built around the lunar nodes, the two points where the Moon's orbit crosses the ecliptic. These points are astronomically significant because eclipses occur only when the Sun and Moon align close enough to the nodal axis.¹¹

The nodes also carry a long symbolic history. In the Latin astronomical tradition, the ascending and descending nodes became known as the Dragon's Head and Dragon's Tail — Caput Draconis and Cauda Draconis. In later Indian astronomical and astrological traditions, the same nodal axis became associated with Rahu (North Node) and Ketu (South Node) and with eclipse mythology.¹²

This dragon symbolism appears clearly in European astronomical works as well. Peter Apian's Astronomicum Caesareum of 1540, for example, depicts the Head and Tail of the Dragon within its astronomical instruments for calculating celestial movement.¹³

FIG. 01 — THE DRAGON AXIS — The lunar nodes as the Dragon's Head and Dragon's Tail.

Modern Draconic Astrology takes this nodal axis and uses it to reorient the entire chart. The calculation begins with the natal North Node. Its longitude is subtracted from every planetary position until the North Node is brought to 0°00′ Aries. Because the South Node sits exactly opposite, it falls at 0°00′ Libra. Every other planet and point shifts by the same amount.

The chart's internal geometry does not change. The planets keep the same angular relationships to one another. What changes is the point of reference: the chart is now expressed relative to the individual's nodal axis.

In modern astrological interpretation, the Draconic chart is commonly described as a soul chart and associated with themes such as true purpose, deeper identity, karmic continuity, and experience extending beyond the present incarnation.¹⁴ Interpretations differ, but the underlying principle is consistent. The nodal axis becomes the frame through which the rest of the chart is read.

For the DG Theory, this makes Draconic the natural first reference.

Draconic → Soul

04 — THE GALACTIC REFERENCE — ORIGIN

If Draconic provides the first reference through its association with the soul, the second reference must address the other half of the theory's central question, which is origin.

The DG Theory approaches this through a galactic frame built around the midpoint of Mula. Within the standard 27-nakshatra system, Mula occupies the first 13°20′ of Sagittarius, placing its midpoint at 6°40′ Sagittarius.¹⁵ When expressed as absolute zodiacal longitude, this position becomes 246°40′. The DG Theory uses this point as the fixed reference for the second rotation of the chart.

The choice of Mula begins with the meaning of the word itself. The Sanskrit mūla means root.¹⁶ The symbolism is simple but important. A root lies beneath what is visible and developed. It points toward foundation, beginning, and the conditions from which later growth becomes possible. For a theory asking whether astrology can look beyond accumulated incarnational experience toward the soul at the beginning of its existence, Mula introduces a symbolic language of origin.

The connection to the Galactic Centre comes from a later development in modern astrology. Astrologers including Nick Anthony Fiorenza and Ernst Wilhelm have developed systems that use galactic geometry in constructing sidereal reference frames, with different approaches giving significance to the region of Mula and its midpoint.¹⁷ ¹⁸ These systems provide part of the modern astrological context in which middle Mula has become associated with galactic orientation.

The DG Theory does not adopt either of these systems directly. It defines 6°40′ Sagittarius, or 246°40′, as its own fixed Mid-Mula rotational reference and applies that same value consistently in every DG calculation.

The 246°40′ value is not itself an ayanamsa, nor does it vary with precession.

This distinction is important because Mula and the Galactic Centre do not come from the same historical tradition. Mula belongs to the ancient Indian nakshatra system, while the relationship between middle Mula and modern galactic astronomy belongs to much more recent astrological work. The DG Theory brings these two references together within a contemporary symbolic and mathematical framework.

The Galactic Centre itself is the central region of the Milky Way, with the compact radio source Sagittarius A* located at its heart.¹⁹ Astronomically, it is part of the physical structure around which the Galaxy is organized. Its relevance to the DG Theory does not depend on treating an astronomical centre as proof of a metaphysical one. The significance lies instead in what a centre can represent within a symbolic system concerned with origin.

This creates a relationship between the ideas of root and centre. Mula points toward what lies at the foundation of something, while the galactic frame points toward the centre of the larger astronomical structure in which our solar system exists. Neither concept establishes the origin of the soul. Together, however, they provide a coherent symbolic basis for asking whether an astrological reference can be constructed around the idea of origin itself.

FIG. 02 — THE GALACTIC REFERENCE — DG-defined Mid-Mula reference — 6°40′ Sagittarius / 246°40′ absolute longitude.

The question of origin also reaches beyond astrology. Across philosophical and religious traditions, creation has often been understood through images of emergence from an earlier state. Primordial waters, darkness, the cosmic egg, maternal imagery, generation, and world birth all appear in different accounts of how differentiated existence comes into being.²⁰ These traditions differ greatly in theology and meaning, and they should not be treated as variations of one universal creation story. Their relevance here lies in a more limited observation. Human beings have repeatedly imagined creation as a movement from an originating state into manifested existence.

The DG Theory uses the term cosmological womb to describe this symbolic idea of passage.

Within the ontology established earlier, the cosmological womb is not God. God remains the Creator of the Universe and the source of the soul's creation. The Galactic Centre is therefore not being proposed as the Creator, nor as the force responsible for bringing the soul into existence. The womb instead represents a possible symbolic threshold between creation and manifestation, through which what has already been created may enter differentiated and temporal existence.

This distinction is central to the theory. The DG Theory does not treat creation and subsequent existence as identical conditions. Its central question depends upon the possibility that the soul may first exist in its created state and later enter the cycle of time, where experience, embodiment, relationship, consequence, and karma begin to accumulate.

The symbolism of the womb offers a way of representing the movement between these states without confusing the passage with the source that created what passes through it.

Comparable ideas of emergence appear within very different cosmological traditions. Upaniṣadic and later Hindu traditions contain varied accounts of primordial states, creation, and the emergence of differentiated existence.²¹ These accounts do not form a single doctrine, but they demonstrate a longstanding philosophical concern with the relationship between what exists at the beginning and what later appears in manifested form.

Maya cosmology provides a different point of comparison because the Milky Way itself participates in creation-related symbolism. Prudence Rice's study of early Maya E Groups examines relationships between architecture, the Milky Way, and creation imagery within early Maya cosmology.²² Again, the comparison does not imply that Maya cosmology and Indian cosmology describe the same process. They arise from different cultures and metaphysical systems. What matters for the present theory is that cosmic structure has repeatedly been used as a way of thinking about emergence, orientation, and the beginning of manifested existence.

The Cosmic Egg offers another expression of this problem. Variations of the motif appear across several ancient cosmological traditions, where the egg represents an original condition containing the potential for a world that has not yet fully emerged.²³ It is therefore an image not simply of creation, but of the interval between potential and differentiated form.

Later Orphic material introduces a further symbolic connection. In the Hieronyman cosmogonic tradition, the serpentine figure of Chronos participates in the production and division of a cosmic egg from which Protogonos emerges.²⁴ The importance of this material within the present theory is not that it predicts or validates the DG system. It is that serpent imagery and the symbolism of emergence appear together within an account of cosmic generation.

That relationship becomes relevant because the first coordinate system used by the DG Theory already carries its own ancient dragon symbolism. The lunar nodes are the Dragon's Head and the Dragon's Tail, and Draconic astrology takes that nodal axis as the reference through which the chart is reoriented.

The second stage of the theory then takes that Draconic chart and subjects it to a further rotation using the fixed Mid-Mula reference. The symbolic movement is therefore from a coordinate system historically associated with the dragon and interpreted in modern astrology through the soul, toward a second reference built around Mula as root and considered within a wider galactic framework concerned with centre, emergence, and origin.

At this point, the two references that define the theory can be stated clearly. Draconic astrology provides the reference associated with the soul. The DG-defined Mid-Mula rotation provides the proposed reference associated with origin.

The philosophical, cosmological, and historical material does not prove that either reference possesses these meanings in any absolute sense. Its purpose is to establish the reasoning behind their selection and to make clear the symbolic proposition being tested when they are brought together.

The coordinates themselves are mathematically inevitable. Their symbolism is not.

The theory must therefore move from symbolic reasoning to mathematical construction and ask what actually occurs when these two references are combined.

05 — THE MATHEMATICS

With the two references established — Draconic for soul and the DG-defined Mid-Mula reference for origin — the transformation itself can now be stated.

It happens in two rotations.

The first reorients the chart around the individual's North Node.

The second rotates that Draconic chart through the fixed DG Mid-Mula reference of 246°40′.

FIG. 03 — THE DRACONIC GALACTIC TRANSFORMATION — Natal → Draconic → DG. Angular relationships are preserved while the coordinate reference changes.

Step One — The Draconic Rotation

Let λₚ represent the absolute ecliptic longitude of any planet or point P, and λₙ the absolute ecliptic longitude of the natal North Node.

The Draconic longitude is:

D(P) = (λₚ − λₙ) mod 360°

In plain terms, the longitude of the North Node is subtracted from every position in the chart.

That moves the North Node to zero:

D(NN) = (λₙ − λₙ) mod 360° = 0°

The Draconic North Node therefore always occupies:

0°00′ Aries

The South Node is exactly 180° opposite, so it occupies:

0°00′ Libra

Every other position is moved by the same amount.

The important point is that the chart has been rotated, not internally rearranged. The angular relationships among its planets and points remain intact.

Step Two — The DG Fixed Mid-Mula Rotation

The second rotation begins with those Draconic positions and applies the fixed DG Mid-Mula reference:

246°40′

This corresponds to:

6°40′ Sagittarius

If D(P) is the Draconic longitude calculated in Step One, the DG longitude becomes:

DG(P) = (D(P) − 246°40′) mod 360°

Substituting the Draconic equation gives the complete transformation:

DG(P) = (λₚ − λₙ − 246°40′) mod 360°

The entire Draconic chart is therefore rotated again by the same fixed amount.

Because both stages are rigid rotations, the angular separation between any two planets remains unchanged.

Ordinary longitude-based aspects are therefore invariant across:

Natal → Draconic → DG

What changes is the coordinate frame through which the positions are expressed.

The Resulting Nodal Axis

The nodal result follows directly from the construction.

Every Draconic North Node already begins at:

0°00′ Aries

Applying the fixed 246°40′ rotation gives:

0°00′ − 246°40′ = −246°40′

Wrapped through 360°:

360°00′ − 246°40′ = 113°20′

And:

113°20′ = 23°20′ Cancer

The Draconic South Node begins at:

180°00′

Applying the same rotation:

180°00′ − 246°40′ = −66°40′

Wrapped through 360°:

360°00′ − 66°40′ = 293°20′

And:

293°20′ = 23°20′ Capricorn

The DG nodal axis is therefore:

North Node / Dragon's Head — 23°20′ Cancer

South Node / Dragon's Tail — 23°20′ Capricorn

These coordinates will appear in every DG chart.

This fixed axis is a mathematical consequence of the method, not an independent finding.

The reason is simple: Draconic astrology has already normalized every North Node to the same zero point before the same fixed second rotation is applied.

The planets remain individualized because they do not begin from that universal zero.

Each planet enters the calculation from its own angular relationship to the individual's natal North Node. The Draconic rotation preserves that relationship, and the DG rotation carries it into the new coordinate frame.

So the method produces two things at once:

a universal DG nodal axis produced by construction, and individualized planetary positions produced by each natal chart's unique geometry.

The mathematics defines the coordinate system.

What that system means is a separate question.

06 — THE DG HYPOTHESIS

The preceding sections establish the two references and the transformation that combines them.

Their proposed relationship can be stated simply:

Draconic → Soul

DG-Defined Mid-Mula → Origin

Draconic Galactic → Soul through Origin

From this relationship, the DG Theory proposes the following hypothesis:

Applying the DG-defined fixed Mid-Mula rotation to the Draconic chart may produce an astrological coordinate framework capable of pointing toward the soul as created, before its entry into the cycle of time.

The calculation establishes the coordinate transformation.

The hypothesis concerns what that transformation may represent.

The surrounding symbolism of root, centre, womb, and emergence provides the cosmological context in which their combination is being considered.

The hypothesis is that the resulting individualized planetary positions may contain a coherent symbolic representation of the soul at its original threshold — before accumulated experience within the cycle of time begins.

Whether they do is the subject of the research.

07 — ONGOING RESEARCH

The DG Theory is a proposed framework in progress.

Its coordinate transformation can be defined mathematically. Its interpretation cannot yet be treated as established.

The next stage of research concerns the individualized planetary positions produced by the transformation.

The nodal axis itself will always resolve to 23°20′ Cancer–Capricorn because that result is built into the mathematics. The planets are different. Each preserves its individual relationship to the natal nodal axis before being carried through the fixed DG Mid-Mula rotation.

The central research question is therefore whether those planetary positions describe something meaningfully distinct from established Draconic interpretation.

That requires comparison across a larger body of unrelated charts: looking for repeated patterns, testing whether planetary functions and sign placements remain coherent, and determining whether the same interpretive principles continue to hold from one chart to another.

Some parts of the system are already mathematically constrained. Ordinary longitude-based aspects cannot become new DG variables because their angular relationships remain unchanged under rigid rotation. They can instead serve as invariants or internal controls.

Other areas remain methodologically open. A distinct DG house procedure has not yet been defined, and any use of nakshatras requires a clear decision about the reference boundaries against which DG positions would be measured.

Those questions belong to the next stage of the work.

The distinction at the centre of the research remains simple: a coordinate transformation can be mathematically valid without its proposed symbolic interpretation being correct.

The mathematics can remain internally consistent even if continued observation requires the interpretation to change.

The DG Theory therefore proceeds from a defined method and an unresolved proposition:

whether orienting a soul-based astrological system through a proposed coordinate of origin can reveal something coherent about the soul at the beginning of its existence.

The theory does not present that proposition as an established answer.

It presents a method for investigating it.

The research is ongoing.

Notes

  1. Carl Huffman, “Pythagoreanism,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, substantive revision March 5, 2024.
  2. André Laks and Glenn W. Most, eds. and trans., Early Greek Philosophy, Volume V: Western Greek Thinkers, Part 2, Empedocles D10; M. David Litwa, Posthuman Transformation in Ancient Mediterranean Thought: Becoming Angels and Demons, 31–44.
  3. Plato, Meno 81b–86c, in Complete Works, ed. John M. Cooper.
  4. Plato, Phaedo 72e–77a, in Complete Works, ed. John M. Cooper.
  5. Plato, Phaedrus 245c–249d, in Complete Works, ed. John M. Cooper.
  6. Plato, Republic 614b–621d, in Complete Works, ed. John M. Cooper.
  7. Plotinus, The Enneads, V.1.
  8. Patrick Olivelle, The Early Upaniṣads: Annotated Text and Translation.
  9. Brian Ogren, Renaissance and Rebirth: Reincarnation in Early Modern Italian Kabbalah.
  10. Peter Adamson, Ibn Sīnā (Avicenna): A Very Short Introduction.
  11. NASA, “Moon Essentials: Orbit,” NASA Scientific Visualization Studio, July 18, 2024.
  12. Willy Hartner, “The Pseudoplanetary Nodes of the Moon's Orbit in Hindu and Islamic Iconographies: A Contribution to the History of Ancient and Medieval Astrology,” 112–154.
  13. Peter Apian, Astronomicum Caesareum (1540); Hartner, “The Pseudoplanetary Nodes of the Moon's Orbit.”
  14. Pamela Crane, The Draconic Chart.
  15. Dieter Koch, “Ayanamshas in Sidereal Astrology.”
  16. Monier Monier-Williams, A Sanskrit-English Dictionary.
  17. Nick Anthony Fiorenza, An Introduction to Astronomical Astrology, 2nd ed., 62–64; Dieter Koch, “Ayanamshas in Sidereal Astrology.” Fiorenza's Galactic Equatorial Ayanamsa fixes the Galactic Equatorial Node at 5°00′ sidereal Sagittarius and varies with precession; it is therefore distinct from the fixed DG rotation.
  18. Koch, “Ayanamshas in Sidereal Astrology.” Koch's discussion distinguishes Fiorenza's Galactic Equatorial Ayanamsa from Ernst Wilhelm's documented middle-Mula constructions, including the Ardra Galactic Plane and Dhruva Galactic Center Middle Mula ayanamsas.
  19. NASA, “Milky Way's Central Black Hole Woke Up 200 Years Ago, NASA's IXPE Finds,” June 21, 2023.
  20. David A. Leeming, World Mythology: A Very Short Introduction.
  21. Patrick Olivelle, The Early Upaniṣads: Annotated Text and Translation; Monier-Williams, A Sanskrit-English Dictionary.
  22. Prudence M. Rice, “Early Maya E Groups, the Milky Way, and Creation,” 262–277.
  23. Leeming, World Mythology: A Very Short Introduction.
  24. Amir Ahmadi, “Divine Procreation of the World in Zoroastrian Pahlavi Texts,” 460.

References

Adamson, Peter. 2023. Ibn Sīnā (Avicenna): A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780192846983.001.0001 (https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780192846983.001.0001).

Ahmadi, Amir. 2021. “Divine Procreation of the World in Zoroastrian Pahlavi Texts.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 84 (3): 443–467. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X21000768 (https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X21000768).

Apian, Peter. 1540. Astronomicum Caesareum. Ingolstadt. Lessing J. Rosenwald Collection, Library of Congress. https://www.loc.gov/item/13033976/ (https://www.loc.gov/item/13033976/).

Crane, Pamela. 2013. The Draconic Chart. Flare Publications. ISBN 9781903353127.

Fiorenza, Nick Anthony. 2015. An Introduction to Astronomical Astrology. 2nd ed. Lulu. https://www.lulu.com/shop/nick-anthony-fiorenza/an-introduction-to-astronomical-astrology/paperback/product-17942d42.html (https://www.lulu.com/shop/nick-anthony-fiorenza/an-introduction-to-astronomical-astrology/paperback/product-17942d42.html).

Hartner, Willy. 1938. “The Pseudoplanetary Nodes of the Moon's Orbit in Hindu and Islamic Iconographies: A Contribution to the History of Ancient and Medieval Astrology.” Ars Islamica 5 (2): 112–154. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4520926 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/4520926).

Huffman, Carl. 2024. “Pythagoreanism.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Substantive revision March 5, 2024. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pythagoreanism/ (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pythagoreanism/).

Koch, Dieter. 2020. “Ayanamshas in Sidereal Astrology.” Astrodienst. Updated January 7, 2020. https://www.astro.com/astrology/in\_ayanamsha\_e.htm (https://www.astro.com/astrology/in_ayanamsha_e.htm).

Laks, André, and Glenn W. Most, eds. and trans. 2016. Early Greek Philosophy, Volume V: Western Greek Thinkers, Part 2. Loeb Classical Library 528. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Leeming, David A. 2022. World Mythology: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780197548264.001.0001 (https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780197548264.001.0001).

Litwa, M. David. 2021. Posthuman Transformation in Ancient Mediterranean Thought: Becoming Angels and Demons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108921572 (https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108921572).

Monier-Williams, Monier. 1899. A Sanskrit-English Dictionary: Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with Special Reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Digital edition, Cologne Digital Sanskrit Dictionaries. https://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/scans/MWScan/2020/web/index.php (https://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/scans/MWScan/2020/web/index.php).

NASA. 2023. “Milky Way's Central Black Hole Woke Up 200 Years Ago, NASA's IXPE Finds.” June 21, 2023. https://www.nasa.gov/missions/ixpe/milky-ways-central-black-hole-woke-up-200-years-ago-nasas-ixpe-finds/ (https://www.nasa.gov/missions/ixpe/milky-ways-central-black-hole-woke-up-200-years-ago-nasas-ixpe-finds/).

NASA. 2024. “Moon Essentials: Orbit.” NASA Scientific Visualization Studio. July 18, 2024. https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/5326/ (https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/5326/).

Ogren, Brian. 2009. Renaissance and Rebirth: Reincarnation in Early Modern Italian Kabbalah. Studies in Jewish History and Culture 24. Leiden: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004177642.i-322 (https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004177642.i-322).

Olivelle, Patrick. 1998. The Early Upaniṣads: Annotated Text and Translation. New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195124354.001.0001 (https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195124354.001.0001).

Plato. 1997. Complete Works. Edited by John M. Cooper; associate editor D. S. Hutchinson. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.

Plotinus. 2017. Plotinus: The Enneads. Edited and translated by Lloyd P. Gerson, with George Boys-Stones, John M. Dillon, R. A. H. King, Andrew Smith, and James Wilberding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9780511736490 (https://doi.org/10.1017/9780511736490).

Rice, Prudence M. 2024. “Early Maya E Groups, the Milky Way, and Creation.” Ancient Mesoamerica 35 (1): 262–277. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0956536123000020 (https://doi.org/10.1017/S0956536123000020).