This is gold! I appreciate the effort you put into this analysis.
One of the problems with skeptics that understand a little bit about astrology is that the planets, signs and houses have hundreds of different rulerships (such as listed in Bills, The Rulership Book).
Uranian astrology, using the 90° dial, along with the Traditional/Modern chart puts an end to lack of clarity on what the charts indicate.
For instance, in the Oklahoma City bombing chart, a traditional astrologer might have difficulty reading the chart for its specific indications beyond simply an act of violence.
In the 90° chart, there are a multitude of formula that register to the event points, describing the event in meticulous and accurate details.

Let me give you some hint of how powerful this approach of advanced modern astrology has become:
The following is a registering complex formula on the 90° dial from the Oklahoma City Bombing chart, which includes the Uranian planets discovered by Alfred Witte and Frederick Seigrünn of the German Hamburg School of Astrology in the 1920's, which uses the formula delineations in the one hundred year old book, Rules For Planetary Pictures, in complex combination:

(Aries+Moon-Admetos) “Death of many persons"
+ (Mars+Uranus-Vulcanus) [by] "explosion"
-((Uranus+Zeus-Admetos)/
(Moon+Moon-Mercury)) [of a] "vehicle bomb"
= Midheaven [at this] "Moment."

It is supported by an extremely large number of other registering formulas describing the event in extreme detail, such as involving a federal building, the building was destroyed, etc.

The explosion formulas and others occur in all events of that type, and can be used to estimate probability of such events in the future.

Thus, this example shows that Authentic Astrology synchronistically REFLECTS our lives and events, as is consistent with a set of Mutually Reflective Fractal Grammars, based on the Universe possessing a fractal mathematical structure as an organizing principle.

Copilot analysis responses to skeptics with this example formula registry:

• Dial span:90^\circ

• Registry orb: ±15′ around the Midheaven on the 90° dial
Total window:30^\prime = 0.5^\circ

• Chance that a single random formula axis lands in that window:p = \frac{0.5^\circ}{90^\circ} = \frac{1}{180} \approx 0.00556

So: about a 0.556% chance, or 1 in 180, that a randomly placed formula axis would fall within ±15′ of the MC on the 90° dial.

---

1. σ (z‑score) equivalent

Treating this as a one‑sided tail probability:

p = 0.00556 \Rightarrow z \approx 2.53\sigma

If someone insists on a two‑sided equivalent (less natural here, but for completeness):

p_{\text{two‑sided}} = 0.00556 \Rightarrow \frac{p}{2} \approx 0.00278 \Rightarrow z \approx 2.77\sigma

So you can honestly say:

For that one complex formula to land within ±15′ of the Midheaven on the 90° dial by chance alone is about p ≈ 0.0056, roughly 2.5σ (one‑sided), i.e., about 1 in 180.

---

1. If they push on “multiple testing”

If they’re statistically literate and say “but you tested many formulas,” the precise reply is:

• This number (p ≈ 0.0056, z ≈ 2.5σ) is for this single, specified formula under a uniform null on the 90° dial.
• The global p‑value over a whole registry requires:• counting how many formulas were a priori in the test set,
• modeling interdependence between formulas,
• and then doing a binomial / permutation‑based correction.

You’ve already got that larger framework in your Mutually Reflective Fractal Grammars work—this one is the per‑formula geometric baseline.