The Method
How a document that has never met you can be right about you.
This page is the full account of what the instrument does, what it is built from, and where it stops being reliable. It is longer than a sales page needs to be. That is deliberate — an instrument you cannot inspect is one you are being asked to take on faith.
The problem with a single input
Every self-assessment you have taken shares one structural flaw: the only thing it knows about you is what you told it.
You answer forty questions about how you behave. An algorithm sorts your answers into a type. The type is then described back to you in language more precise than you would have used yourself, and the precision feels like discovery. It is not. It is your own self-image, returned with better tailoring.
This is not a flaw in any particular test. It is a property of the format. A single self-reported input cannot tell you anything you did not already know about yourself, because you are the only source it has.
Astrology applications fail in the mirror image of this. They take one input you did not choose — your birth month — and return text that was written before you existed and is shared with roughly a twelfth of the population. The reason it feels accurate is that it was engineered to feel accurate to anyone.
The instrument described on this page uses two inputs that were produced independently of each other. Neither can be adjusted to agree with the other after the fact.
Input one · not self-reported
Eleven bodies placed by exact zodiac longitude at the minute and place of your birth. Astronomical, fixed, computed. You cannot revise it, and it was not written with you in mind.
Input two · self-reported
Twelve questions about behavior under pressure, branched to your actual friction point. Only you could supply these answers.
The reading
Not either input restated. The reading lives in the relationship between them — where they agree, where they contradict each other, and what the contradiction implies.
The astronomical half
Sample wheel · ascendant on the left · aspects drawn to scale
Your chart is computed, not looked up.
There is no table of pre-written sun-sign paragraphs anywhere in this system. Your birth date, birth time, city and country are resolved into coordinates and a timezone, and the sky at that exact moment is reconstructed from the Swiss Ephemeris — the same astronomical dataset used in professional astrological practice and derived from NASA's JPL planetary data.
Eleven points are placed: the Sun, Moon and Ascendant, then Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto. Each is resolved to its sign, its house, and its degree within that sign.
The angular relationships between those points — the aspects — are then measured, and the six tightest major aspects are carried into the reading. Six, not everything: an aspect list that includes everything is a list in which nothing is significant.
Ephemeris
Swiss Ephemeris, accessed through the Kerykeion library. Sub-arcsecond planetary positions; the reference implementation used across serious astrological software.
Zodiac
Tropical, apparent geocentric — the standard frame of Western practice, measured from the vernal equinox rather than the fixed stars.
House system
Placidus, the most widely used system in Western astrology. Houses depend on your birth time and latitude, which is why both are asked for and why an unknown birth time is handled explicitly rather than guessed.
Points placed
Eleven — Sun, Moon, Ascendant, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto. Each with sign, house and degree.
Aspects
The six tightest of the five major aspects — conjunction, opposition, square, trine, sextile — ranked by orb, so the closest and therefore strongest relationships are the ones that reach the page.
Location
Your birth city and country are resolved to coordinates and a historical timezone through GeoNames. Country is required, not optional — "Lisbon" alone is ambiguous, and a chart computed for the wrong Lisbon is not a chart.
The behavioral half
Twelve questions, drawn from a pool of twenty-one, scored onto six axes.
The questions are not asked in a fixed order. Four are universal — how you respond to stress, what you were taught to be as a child, which self you present in public. A fifth routes you: it asks where the friction actually is in your life right now, and your answer sends you down one of three branches — career, intimacy, or purpose. The six questions that follow are the six that belong to that branch. Two more close the set.
The branch matters. Asking a person in a collapsing relationship about their delegation style produces an answer, but not a useful one. The point of branching is that every question you are asked is a question you have a real answer to.
Your answers are then scored onto six axes, each on a scale of 0 to 100. The axes are not virtues. A high score is not good and a low score is not a failing — each one describes a position with a cost attached at either end.
Control
How tightly outcomes, standards and other people are gripped.
- High
- nothing is left to chance, including things that should be
- Low
- adaptable, or drifting, depending on the rest of the chart
Emotional Access
How readily felt experience reaches expression.
- High
- feeling arrives and is legible, to you and to others
- Low
- the feeling is present but arrives late, or as something else
Risk Appetite
Genuine tolerance for exposure, as distinct from rebranded caution.
- High
- acts before certainty, accepts the cost of being wrong
- Low
- waits for proof, and calls the waiting strategy
Persona Rigidity
How fused the public self has become with the person underneath it.
- High
- the performance is now load-bearing and cannot be dropped
- Low
- the same person appears in most rooms
Rest Capacity
The ability to stop without manufacturing an emergency.
- High
- stillness is available and not threatening
- Low
- rest requires a justification, or a collapse
Shadow Integration
How much exiled material is consciously owned and put to use.
- High
- the disowned parts are known, and used deliberately
- Low
- they still run, but from outside your line of sight
Where the reading actually happens
A chart on its own is a structure with no evidence. A questionnaire on its own is evidence with no structure. The document is written at the join.
Every finding in your Blueprint comes from one of three relationships between the two halves. The document is explicit about which one it is using, because they do not carry the same weight.
01
Agreement
The chart implies a pattern and your answers show it operating. This is the strongest class of finding — two independent sources converging. It is also the least surprising to read, because it usually describes something you have half-known for years.
02
Collision
The chart implies one thing and your behavior shows the opposite. This is the most valuable class of finding. A structural capacity that is not showing up in your life has usually been suppressed, and the interesting question is what it cost you to suppress it.
03
Silence
The chart is loud about something your answers never mention. Not a contradiction — an absence. These become the parts of the document you are most likely to argue with on first reading, and most likely to return to.
How the document gets written
Your chart and your scored answers are passed to a large language model, which writes the twenty-four pages against a fixed structure.
This is stated plainly rather than buried, because it is the part most sellers of documents like this one leave out. What the model receives is your computed chart and your scored profile — not your name, and not your email address. What it produces is prose, written to a specification that fixes the document's structure, its section order, and its register.
The specification is the actual product. It is what stops the output becoming the affirming, weightless material this format usually produces. It requires every claim to be traceable to a placement, an aspect, or an axis score; it forbids prediction; and it explicitly instructs against flattery — including the softer kind, where a limitation is described so warmly that it stops being a limitation.
The document is then typeset into a designed PDF and emailed to you, normally within a few minutes. It is deleted from our systems at that point. Your inbox holds the only copy.
From the orientation page of every document
Where the two instruments agree, pay attention. Where they surprise you, read it twice before deciding it is wrong.
No human reads your answers. The pipeline is automated end to end. Nobody at Psyche ID sits down with your material.
Your name and email never reach the model. Only the chart and the scored profile are sent.
No two documents are the same. There is no template being filled in. The structure is fixed; every sentence inside it is generated for your chart alone.
Precision, and where it runs out
The single largest source of error in any natal chart is the birth time, and it is the one variable we cannot verify.
The Sun, Moon and planets move slowly enough that an hour of uncertainty barely disturbs them. The Ascendant does not. It advances through roughly one full degree every four minutes, which means it changes sign about every two hours — and because the Ascendant defines the first house, an error there rotates the entire house structure of your chart.
So the quiz asks you to state your confidence, and the system does something with the answer. If you mark your birth time approximate or unknown, your document says so on its own cover, and every claim that depends on the Ascendant or on house position is hedged in the text rather than asserted.
A document that quietly presents a guess as a finding is worse than one that admits the gap. This one admits the gap.
Exact
From a birth certificate or hospital record. Houses and Ascendant are treated as reliable, and the document reads at full confidence.
Approximate
Family memory, or "sometime in the morning". Planetary material stands; house and Ascendant claims are marked as provisional in the text.
Unknown
The document is still worth having — signs, aspects and the full behavioral profile are unaffected — but it will tell you, on the cover, which of its conclusions it is standing behind less firmly.
What is being claimed, and what is not
Astrology is not an empirical science, and this page will not pretend otherwise in order to sell you something.
What is being claimed is narrower, and survives the objection. Your chart is a structured description of you that you did not write, cannot revise, and did not choose — and that is a genuinely rare thing to hold up against your own account of yourself. Its value here is not prophetic. It is that it supplies a set of hypotheses about your behavior from outside your self-image, which your own answers then confirm, contradict, or leave conspicuously unaddressed.
A finding in this document is never "your chart says X, therefore X is true of you". It is "your chart raises X; here is what your answers actually show". The reading is always accountable to the behavioral half.
What you are buying is a serious, well-made instrument for looking at yourself from an angle you cannot occupy on your own. What you are not buying is a prediction, a diagnosis, or a scientific measurement of your personality.
Not therapy, and not a substitute for it. If you are in distress, this is the wrong instrument. Speak to a qualified professional.
Not a diagnosis. Nothing here is a clinical assessment of a mental health condition, and it must not be read as one.
Not a forecast. No predictions, no transits, no claims about what will happen to you or when. The chart is read as structure, never as prophecy.
Not a validated psychometric. The six axes are a scoring model built for this instrument. They are not a clinically validated scale and are not presented as one.
What it is built from
The full stack, named. Every part of it can be looked up independently of us.
Astronomy
Swiss Ephemeris via Kerykeion — planetary positions, houses and aspects. Tropical zodiac, Placidus houses, apparent geocentric.
Geography
GeoNames — birth city and country resolved to coordinates and the historically correct timezone for your birth date.
Writing
Claude, by Anthropic, working from your chart and scored profile against a fixed specification. Anthropic's API terms state that inputs and outputs are not used to train their models.
Delivery
Resend — the finished PDF is emailed to the address you gave, then deleted from our systems.
Payment
Lemon Squeezy, acting as merchant of record. We never see or store your card details.
What each of these services receives, and what is kept afterwards, is set out in full in the privacy notice.
One document, one payment
€149
Twenty-four pages, prepared for you alone, delivered by email within minutes of purchase.
The questions take about ten minutes · Payment handled by Lemon Squeezy · VAT included where applicable · Refund policy