Your opinion & share...
Latest topics
» V - REPORT: Korean researchers discovered the 'Suwon crease', only observed in males!
Yesterday at 11:19 am by Martijn (admin)

» Change of direction of fate line
Fri Oct 20, 2017 6:31 pm by Prej52

» Palm reading please reply.
Fri Oct 20, 2017 10:56 am by pravin kumar

» Seeking Medical Palmistry Author
Thu Oct 12, 2017 5:11 pm by jezlucky

» Travel Lines
Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:12 am by kalki

» Simian Line / Single Transverse Palmar Crease
Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:26 pm by Martijn (admin)

» Hasta Samudrika Shastra - the most ancient palmistry system!
Sun Oct 08, 2017 10:13 am by Martijn (admin)

» Hands & the Major Factor of Personality!
Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:41 pm by Martijn (admin)

» best way to learn
Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:00 pm by Martijn (admin)

» THE MOST CHALLENGING HAND: Simian Lines, Murderer’s Thumbs & Radial loops
Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:05 am by lawrencerook

» Palm is blackish
Wed Sep 06, 2017 3:57 am by pravin kumar

» Worries and stress
Sun Sep 03, 2017 5:03 pm by bmcgowra

» is chinese palmistry compatible with western palmistry
Fri Aug 25, 2017 6:49 pm by nuttyprofessor

» wheel sign on the palm
Fri Aug 25, 2017 5:53 pm by appanna

» White spots on palm
Wed Aug 23, 2017 2:05 am by Lynn

Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Who is online?
In total there are 39 users online :: 1 Registered, 0 Hidden and 38 Guests

Martijn (admin)

[ View the whole list ]


Most users ever online was 293 on Mon Jul 25, 2011 11:22 am
Moderators & partners

• Discover the Modern Hand Reading Forum partners:

Would you like to see your website listed?

Modern Hand Reading Forum Partners

Pointing finger: check this out!

Statistics
We have 5225 registered users
The newest registered user is HannaKarlsson

Our users have posted a total of 43301 messages in 4303 subjects
Recommendations

• The FREE hand reading services at the Modern Hand Reading Forum are being continued in 2015 with the assistance of Google adsense!


Pointing finger: check this out!



Google+
MAJOR HAND READING SYNONYMS
Palmistry, Palm Reading, Hand Analysis, Chirology & Chiromancy.

Learn how to read hands according the Modern Hand Reading paradigm & you can use this forum as your palm reading guide!

Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Martijn (admin) on Sat May 04, 2013 5:02 pm

Patti wrote:http://books.google.com/books?id=VYJdLSVW7bMC&pg=RA3-PA35&lpg=RA3-PA35&dq=dermatoglyphics+vestige+column&source=bl&ots=X9gDc7Pw9u&sig=alRNyQRYbGl5U0Svzr6JZBD13yc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vjeFUcipH5T_4AOSn4DYCA&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=dermatoglyphics%20vestige%20column&f=false

The link above shows examples of the thenar mount vestiges. Notice how in Fig. 13 b there is only a slight wave to the ridges and not a distinct angle. A vestige does not require distinct angles to the flow of ridges as you have tried to claim.

This link also shows the configuration called a 'column'.

Patti, all these example clearly show pattern that have a ridge field with a direction about 90 degrees different from the surrounding ridge fields on all sides. So, in my view all these examples show the essential characteristic that I have described in my earlier thenar-vestige example.

In your earlier posts you talked about a 'comb' connected to a 'column', but here there is no mentioning of a 'comb' at all, what is you point to present these materials?

And how do you think that this supports your earlier comments?

___________________________________________
sunny

Martijn van Mensvoort
Hand researcher & psychologist in The Netherlands (Holland)
Presents: Multi-Perspective Palm Reading + the Global Palm Reading Network
avatar
Martijn (admin)
Admin

Posts : 5208
Join date : 2010-07-23
Location : The Netherlands

http://www.handresearch.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Patti on Sat May 04, 2013 5:10 pm

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Patti wrote:http://books.google.com/books?id=VYJdLSVW7bMC&pg=RA3-PA35&lpg=RA3-PA35&dq=dermatoglyphics+vestige+column&source=bl&ots=X9gDc7Pw9u&sig=alRNyQRYbGl5U0Svzr6JZBD13yc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vjeFUcipH5T_4AOSn4DYCA&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=dermatoglyphics%20vestige%20column&f=false

The link above shows examples of the thenar mount vestiges. Notice how in Fig. 13 b there is only a slight wave to the ridges and not a distinct angle. A vestige does not require distinct angles to the flow of ridges as you have tried to claim.

This link also shows the configuration called a 'column'.

Patti, all these example clearly show pattern that have a ridge field with a direction about 90 degrees different from the surrounding ridge fields on all sides. So, in my view all these examples show the essential characteristic that I have described in my earlier thenar-vestige example.

In your earlier posts you talked about a 'comb' connected to a 'column', but here there is no mentioning of a 'comb' at all, what is you point to present these materials?

And how do you think that this supports your earlier comments?

Of course they didn't mention a comb - they are calling it a column. That's what I pointed out. Scroll up at the link and you'll see other examples in the palm of a column. The comb is an object we use on our hair and the design in the palm is being called this because it looks like a comb.
avatar
Patti

Posts : 3912
Join date : 2010-07-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Martijn (admin) on Sat May 04, 2013 5:24 pm

Patti wrote:



Here are two examples from my collection. I would describe the area in interdigital II in the top photo as a vestige and in the bottom image an open field.

To describe both as open fields would then negate the fact there is a disturbance in the ridges in the top image that suggest the construction of a configuration that is more like a comb or a raja loop.

Patti, I have asked you a few times to share you definition of a 'comb'; because to me you are using a language that I no longer understand.

(Because for me it is very obvious that you are not talking about a 'comb' as defined in the works of Loesch and Schaumann & Alter)


By the way, the statistics shared by Cummins & Midlo for ID2 in table 8 page 117, suggest that the 'vestige' can only relate to incomplete loops (where for example a triradius is missing); but not to pattern like see in your first example above... because in that example there is no abrupt change in the 'ridge field' at all, nor is there any sign of a ridge field that has a different orientation compared to the surrounding ridge fields.

So, your example confirms what I observed earlier in this discussion: you tend to perceive/associate any form of 'cushioning' with a 'vestige'... but you should never do that because there is no author at all who has suggested that a 'vestige' can be recognized via the phenomenon of a 'cusp'!

And thus to me this explictely confirms that you have misunderstood things from the bottom, because your use of the word 'vestige' is not supported by any definition (nor any visual example) from the literature that we have discussed so far.

___________________________________________
sunny

Martijn van Mensvoort
Hand researcher & psychologist in The Netherlands (Holland)
Presents: Multi-Perspective Palm Reading + the Global Palm Reading Network
avatar
Martijn (admin)
Admin

Posts : 5208
Join date : 2010-07-23
Location : The Netherlands

http://www.handresearch.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Patti on Sat May 04, 2013 5:36 pm

Here is an example of a comb (interdigital III):





avatar
Patti

Posts : 3912
Join date : 2010-07-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Patti on Sat May 04, 2013 5:43 pm

This example is what I would call a vestige on the hypothenar - I don't think it is defined enough to be considered a true pattern as a ulnar loop. Maybe could be classified a Vestige/Loop.

avatar
Patti

Posts : 3912
Join date : 2010-07-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Martijn (admin) on Sat May 04, 2013 5:45 pm

Patti wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote:
Patti wrote:http://books.google.com/books?id=VYJdLSVW7bMC&pg=RA3-PA35&lpg=RA3-PA35&dq=dermatoglyphics+vestige+column&source=bl&ots=X9gDc7Pw9u&sig=alRNyQRYbGl5U0Svzr6JZBD13yc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vjeFUcipH5T_4AOSn4DYCA&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=dermatoglyphics%20vestige%20column&f=false

The link above shows examples of the thenar mount vestiges. Notice how in Fig. 13 b there is only a slight wave to the ridges and not a distinct angle. A vestige does not require distinct angles to the flow of ridges as you have tried to claim.

This link also shows the configuration called a 'column'.

Patti, all these example clearly show pattern that have a ridge field with a direction about 90 degrees different from the surrounding ridge fields on all sides. So, in my view all these examples show the essential characteristic that I have described in my earlier thenar-vestige example.

In your earlier posts you talked about a 'comb' connected to a 'column', but here there is no mentioning of a 'comb' at all, what is you point to present these materials?

And how do you think that this supports your earlier comments?

Of course they didn't mention a comb - they are calling it a column. That's what I pointed out. Scroll up at the link and you'll see other examples in the palm of a column. The comb is an object we use on our hair and the design in the palm is being called this because it looks like a comb.

Okay Patti, I now understand how you associate a 'comb' with a 'column'-like loop.

But such a comb/column phenomenon is definitely not present in Anand's hand, because in his example there are NO RIDGES at all which end at a ridge that is positioned at about a right angle (90 degrees) to the connecting ridges.

All I can find is exactly only one ridge that is approaching another ridge under an angle of no more than 55 degrees; all other angles are smaller... so your association regarding a 'comb' is a pure fantasy.



___________________________________________
sunny

Martijn van Mensvoort
Hand researcher & psychologist in The Netherlands (Holland)
Presents: Multi-Perspective Palm Reading + the Global Palm Reading Network
avatar
Martijn (admin)
Admin

Posts : 5208
Join date : 2010-07-23
Location : The Netherlands

http://www.handresearch.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Patti on Sat May 04, 2013 5:46 pm

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Patti wrote:



Here are two examples from my collection. I would describe the area in interdigital II in the top photo as a vestige and in the bottom image an open field.

To describe both as open fields would then negate the fact there is a disturbance in the ridges in the top image that suggest the construction of a configuration that is more like a comb or a raja loop.

Patti, I have asked you a few times to share you definition of a 'comb'; because to me you are using a language that I no longer understand.

(Because for me it is very obvious that you are not talking about a 'comb' as defined in the works of Loesch and Schaumann & Alter)


By the way, the statistics shared by Cummins & Midlo for ID2 in table 8 page 117, suggest that the 'vestige' can only relate to incomplete loops (where for example a triradius is missing); but not to pattern like see in your first example above... because in that example there is no abrupt change in the 'ridge field' at all, nor is there any sign of a ridge field that has a different orientation compared to the surrounding ridge fields.

So, your example confirms what I observed earlier in this discussion: you tend to perceive/associate any form of 'cushioning' with a 'vestige'... but you should never do that because there is no author at all who has suggested that a 'vestige' can be recognized via the phenomenon of a 'cusp'!

And thus to me this explictely confirms that you have misunderstood things from the bottom, because your use of the word 'vestige' is not supported by any definition (nor any visual example) from the literature that we have discussed so far.

Converging ridges is described by Cummins & Midlo. You seem to be the one confusing cusp with converging ridges.
avatar
Patti

Posts : 3912
Join date : 2010-07-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Patti on Sat May 04, 2013 5:46 pm

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Patti wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote:
Patti wrote:http://books.google.com/books?id=VYJdLSVW7bMC&pg=RA3-PA35&lpg=RA3-PA35&dq=dermatoglyphics+vestige+column&source=bl&ots=X9gDc7Pw9u&sig=alRNyQRYbGl5U0Svzr6JZBD13yc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vjeFUcipH5T_4AOSn4DYCA&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=dermatoglyphics%20vestige%20column&f=false

The link above shows examples of the thenar mount vestiges. Notice how in Fig. 13 b there is only a slight wave to the ridges and not a distinct angle. A vestige does not require distinct angles to the flow of ridges as you have tried to claim.

This link also shows the configuration called a 'column'.

Patti, all these example clearly show pattern that have a ridge field with a direction about 90 degrees different from the surrounding ridge fields on all sides. So, in my view all these examples show the essential characteristic that I have described in my earlier thenar-vestige example.

In your earlier posts you talked about a 'comb' connected to a 'column', but here there is no mentioning of a 'comb' at all, what is you point to present these materials?

And how do you think that this supports your earlier comments?

Of course they didn't mention a comb - they are calling it a column. That's what I pointed out. Scroll up at the link and you'll see other examples in the palm of a column. The comb is an object we use on our hair and the design in the palm is being called this because it looks like a comb.

Okay Patti, I now understand how you associate a 'comb' with a 'column'-like loop.

But such a comb/column phenomenon is definitely not present in Anand's hand, because in his example there are NO RIDGES at all which end at a ridge that is positioned at about a right angle (90 degrees) to the connecting ridges.

All I can find is exactly only one ridge that is approaching another ridge under an angle of no more than 55 degrees; all other angles are smaller... so your association regarding a 'comb' is a pure fantasy.



That's why I called it a vestige with the appearance of a comb. If it were a comb, I'd call it a comb and not a vestige.
avatar
Patti

Posts : 3912
Join date : 2010-07-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Martijn (admin) on Sat May 04, 2013 5:55 pm

Patti wrote:Here is an example of a comb (interdigital III):




Yes, at the right side of the interdigital III loop there appears to be a pattern that can be associated with a 'comb' (but Cummins & Midlo do not classify 'combinations' for the interdigit zones ID2 and ID3... so that pattern would in there system simply get classified as a 'loop' only).

___________________________________________
sunny

Martijn van Mensvoort
Hand researcher & psychologist in The Netherlands (Holland)
Presents: Multi-Perspective Palm Reading + the Global Palm Reading Network
avatar
Martijn (admin)
Admin

Posts : 5208
Join date : 2010-07-23
Location : The Netherlands

http://www.handresearch.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Martijn (admin) on Sat May 04, 2013 6:00 pm

Patti wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote:
Patti wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote:
Patti wrote:http://books.google.com/books?id=VYJdLSVW7bMC&pg=RA3-PA35&lpg=RA3-PA35&dq=dermatoglyphics+vestige+column&source=bl&ots=X9gDc7Pw9u&sig=alRNyQRYbGl5U0Svzr6JZBD13yc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vjeFUcipH5T_4AOSn4DYCA&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=dermatoglyphics%20vestige%20column&f=false

The link above shows examples of the thenar mount vestiges. Notice how in Fig. 13 b there is only a slight wave to the ridges and not a distinct angle. A vestige does not require distinct angles to the flow of ridges as you have tried to claim.

This link also shows the configuration called a 'column'.

Patti, all these example clearly show pattern that have a ridge field with a direction about 90 degrees different from the surrounding ridge fields on all sides. So, in my view all these examples show the essential characteristic that I have described in my earlier thenar-vestige example.

In your earlier posts you talked about a 'comb' connected to a 'column', but here there is no mentioning of a 'comb' at all, what is you point to present these materials?

And how do you think that this supports your earlier comments?

Of course they didn't mention a comb - they are calling it a column. That's what I pointed out. Scroll up at the link and you'll see other examples in the palm of a column. The comb is an object we use on our hair and the design in the palm is being called this because it looks like a comb.

Okay Patti, I now understand how you associate a 'comb' with a 'column'-like loop.

But such a comb/column phenomenon is definitely not present in Anand's hand, because in his example there are NO RIDGES at all which end at a ridge that is positioned at about a right angle (90 degrees) to the connecting ridges.

All I can find is exactly only one ridge that is approaching another ridge under an angle of no more than 55 degrees; all other angles are smaller... so your association regarding a 'comb' is a pure fantasy.



That's why I called it a vestige with the appearance of a comb. If it were a comb, I'd call it a comb and not a vestige.

Well Patti, this still doesn't makes sense to me; because again, the 'comb' is an aspect that relates to the 'minutiae' and the 'comb' does not belong to the primary pattern configurations.

So, even after you explaned the origins of your suggestion... this does not take away anything of my observation that you have started mixing the classification of the minutiae with the classification of the primary pattern types.

This doesn't make sense, because those systems are not meant to get mixed.


That is why I had to point out that you have created yourself a 'fantasy' system... that nobody really understands except you. I am getting very tired of being confronted with defensive suggestive statements with my arguments being returned like this is some kind of word-game for you.

Very frustrating for me to see you denying everything at any time, while it is very obvious now for me that you are mixing systems... resulting in complete chaos in this discussion.


Last edited by Martijn (admin) on Sat May 04, 2013 6:18 pm; edited 1 time in total

___________________________________________
sunny

Martijn van Mensvoort
Hand researcher & psychologist in The Netherlands (Holland)
Presents: Multi-Perspective Palm Reading + the Global Palm Reading Network
avatar
Martijn (admin)
Admin

Posts : 5208
Join date : 2010-07-23
Location : The Netherlands

http://www.handresearch.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Martijn (admin) on Sat May 04, 2013 6:09 pm

Patti wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote:
Patti wrote:



Here are two examples from my collection. I would describe the area in interdigital II in the top photo as a vestige and in the bottom image an open field.

To describe both as open fields would then negate the fact there is a disturbance in the ridges in the top image that suggest the construction of a configuration that is more like a comb or a raja loop.

Patti, I have asked you a few times to share you definition of a 'comb'; because to me you are using a language that I no longer understand.

(Because for me it is very obvious that you are not talking about a 'comb' as defined in the works of Loesch and Schaumann & Alter)


By the way, the statistics shared by Cummins & Midlo for ID2 in table 8 page 117, suggest that the 'vestige' can only relate to incomplete loops (where for example a triradius is missing); but not to pattern like see in your first example above... because in that example there is no abrupt change in the 'ridge field' at all, nor is there any sign of a ridge field that has a different orientation compared to the surrounding ridge fields.

So, your example confirms what I observed earlier in this discussion: you tend to perceive/associate any form of 'cushioning' with a 'vestige'... but you should never do that because there is no author at all who has suggested that a 'vestige' can be recognized via the phenomenon of a 'cusp'!

And thus to me this explictely confirms that you have misunderstood things from the bottom, because your use of the word 'vestige' is not supported by any definition (nor any visual example) from the literature that we have discussed so far.

Converging ridges is described by Cummins & Midlo. You seem to be the one confusing cusp with converging ridges.

Patti, you are suggestively accusing me again of being 'confused'... without explaining anything at all.

I am getting sick & tired of your discussion style.


Thumb down

___________________________________________
sunny

Martijn van Mensvoort
Hand researcher & psychologist in The Netherlands (Holland)
Presents: Multi-Perspective Palm Reading + the Global Palm Reading Network
avatar
Martijn (admin)
Admin

Posts : 5208
Join date : 2010-07-23
Location : The Netherlands

http://www.handresearch.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  anand_palm on Sun May 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Hello Patti

Sorry I could not reply for the conversation which was going on between martijn and you
Thanks for neatly describing through the pictures the difference between open field and vestiges. It looks a vestige towards a comb, it was quite obvious to me that shape similar to an hair comb is why I mentioned a shape. Iam much clearer than and more convinced that it is a vestige towards comb, I do have few more samples which I can post later for other patterns on which I have doubt.

Also the index finger vestige is similar to the interdigital in the picture I have mentioned except the one which I have posted is for little finger.


Martijn

Iam not understanding why you have mentioned that patti is accusing you, i do not see anything of that sort.
"Patti, you are suggestively accusing me again of being 'confused'... without explaining anything at all.

I am getting sick & tired of your discussion style"

I don't think from the discussion which iam reading patti is accusing you, you are wrong in your judgement on this

Anand

avatar
anand_palm

Posts : 393
Join date : 2010-11-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Martijn (admin) on Sun May 05, 2013 4:28 pm


Anand, by principle both the 'comb' and the 'vestige' require the presence of ridge systems positioned close to each other that show evidence of a different direction - which would manifest as an abrupt chance of direction in the ridges..

So, any 'vestige towards a comb' would at least require the present of at least two ridge systems positioned close to each other that show a clear difference in direction.

Regarding your example, basically all ridge systems in your example show only a gradual change in direction, which only relates to the phenomenon of 'cushioning'. But an abrupt change of direction is missing in your example... and therefore it is not accurate to associate this with a 'comb', 'vestige' or 'vestige towards a comb'.

(Part of the problem here is that Patti never talked about the angles between the ridge systems inside your example, which could explain why she doesn't follow how the 'vestige' and 'comb' have been defined in the literature)


PS. Sorry, I am not going to spell out the details, but my response to Patti is the result of a series of suggestions inside at least 4 of Patti's earlier responses inside this topic (and some of those responses did not directly relate to what I had actually described).

___________________________________________
sunny

Martijn van Mensvoort
Hand researcher & psychologist in The Netherlands (Holland)
Presents: Multi-Perspective Palm Reading + the Global Palm Reading Network
avatar
Martijn (admin)
Admin

Posts : 5208
Join date : 2010-07-23
Location : The Netherlands

http://www.handresearch.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Martijn (admin) on Tue May 07, 2013 11:16 am

Patti wrote:I think it would be considered a vestige bordering on a comb.

I have been re-reading this discussion (+ the literature mentioned) by detail, and I found that inside the literature a 'vestige' is ALWAYS described like I refered to via the definitions described in e.g. the works of Cummins & Midlo and Loesch.

However... for (fingerprint) patterns that do not show all characteristics required to call a major pattern type, the literature also speaks of so-called 'vestigial loops', 'vestigial whorls', 'vestigial double loops', 'vestigial central pocket loops', etc.

R.G. Gibbs presented in 1967 a clear definition for a 'vestigial pattern' in the field of dermatoglyphics:

"A vestigial pattern is a local disarrangement of ridges which does not show
clear- cut resemblance to the above definable types."


This implicates that in the literature only the word 'vestigial' is being used (for quite a few decades) to describe incomplete patterns when not all necessary characteristics are present to call the presence of one of the primary types of configuration.

(EDIT: The fundamental diffference between 'vestiges' and 'vestigial patterns' is also confirmed by the info inside the table which I featured in one of my earlier post inside this topic - see below)




Now, IF Patti would have started talking about a 'vestigial comb' it would at least have made sense in the perspective of the literature. But her rather short description in her first post inside this topic actually suggested by fact that she was talking about some kind of 'vestige-comb' combination manifesting as one single pattern.

Only later it became apparent that such a combination-pattern was not what Patti actually had in mind; in short: Patti's choice of words in her first post by fact sort of described a 'vestige-comb' combination... but later it became obvious that that was not what she actually had in mind, because what she had in mind relates to what one could describe as 'vestigial comb'.

(NOTICE: In the field of dermatoglyphics the terms 'vestigial comb' or 'comb vestigial' have never been used because the 'comb' is not a primary type of configuration... because the 'comb' is actually ranked to the so-called minutiae. By the way, in the modern system of fingerprint classification developed by the FBI the words 'vestige' and 'vestigial' also play no role at all - nor does the 'comb').


So, this explains more explicite why it took me some time to understand what Patti had in mind (and why Anand also made a request to Patti to explain what she exactly had in mind)... because according the vocabulary used in the literature I now recognize that in her first response to Anand (quoted above) Patti simply even failed to describe what she actually had in mind.

Thus I have to conclude here that any of Patti's accusations against my input in this topic were inappropriate, because Patti simply failed herself in her very first post inside this topic to accurately describe what she actually had in mind.

And I perceive all further misunderstandings inside this discussion (I am not going to report the details but I am now aware that there are plenty) can be recognized to be the direct- or indirect result of that rather simple mistake in Patti's first post.

I hope this report is helpful to understand why I had to conclude that Patti started using some kind of fantasy-language where things get mixed in a way that I can no longer understand.


Meanwhile I felt that my attempt to discuss the details got obstructed by Patti's rather suggestive accusations (about that I had been misreading the literature and about the reason why I was not immediately able to understand her words - which she attributes to her rich experience in the practice of reading hands).

And because I also noticed that my requests to Patti to share her definition of a comb got ignored (or answered with suggestive posts with info that did not directly answer my request)... I decided to take drastic action beyond the scope of this discussion in order to put an end to this chaotic discussion process.


Last edited by Martijn (admin) on Tue May 07, 2013 10:52 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Table added)

___________________________________________
sunny

Martijn van Mensvoort
Hand researcher & psychologist in The Netherlands (Holland)
Presents: Multi-Perspective Palm Reading + the Global Palm Reading Network
avatar
Martijn (admin)
Admin

Posts : 5208
Join date : 2010-07-23
Location : The Netherlands

http://www.handresearch.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Sue Miller on Tue May 07, 2013 12:18 pm

well I was really enjoying the banter, but most of all the wealth of information given by Patti and Martijn was most helpful in clearing up the matter of patterns that do not conform to certain criteria. One of Anand's queries, I believe, refers to how these type of markings can be integrated into a reading. I kind of look at them and think which category of marking do they most resemble, if it resemble a loop then depending on where it is I can modify the absolute meaning to something more approximate, of course all of the time I am asking questions of the enquirer and getting confirmation...or not.... until eventually we get to a rounded reading.
I do find though sometimes misunderstandings in semantics in a worlwide forum such as this one do create confusion, however both Patti and Martijn found the patience to pick through and unravel that, giving us very interesting answers to Anand's query
so thanks
Sue
avatar
Sue Miller

Posts : 174
Join date : 2011-03-30
Age : 69
Location : England

http://www.suemillerpalmistry.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Martijn (admin) on Wed May 08, 2013 10:56 am

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Hi Anand,

I wouldn't describe it as any pattern at all, because basically all I see are ridges directed in sort of the same direction (with some of them ending, and some are fusing).

I see no ridges that could justify to call it a 'comb', nor a 'vestige'... because both would require the presence of number ridges that clearly have a different direction than the surrounding ridges.

I hope this makes sense?


wave

As a final argument I would like to add that one can also find a clear parallel between the characteristics seen in Anand's example and arch-example no.116 inside the FBI's The Science of Fingerprints.

Zoomed version of Anand's example:





FBI example no/116:


The argument which the FBI describes for example no.107 to 118 is basically exactly the same argument that I have presented in my very first post inside the topic (quoted above):

"Figures 107 to 118 are examples of the plain arch. It will be noted that there may be various ridge formations such as ending ridges, bifurcations, dots and islands involved in this type of pattern, but they all tend to follow the general ridge contour; i.e., they enter on one side, make a rise or wave in the center, and flow or tend to flow out the other side."

Because due to the missing of a sharp angle I have described that there is basically no abrupt change in ridge direction inside Anand's example at all.





NOTICE: In the science of fingerprints one can also see that no. 118 and no. 119 have also been described as plain arches - though these approach towards a tented arch due to the abrupt ending of various parallel ridges creating a sharp angle inside the ridge flow of about a 100 degrees (almost a right angle).

However, in Anand's example the angle is close to a 130 degrees (much larger than in examples no. 118 and no.119), plus the ridges involved do not show a likewise parallel abrupt ending (examples no. 118 and no.119 do have the characteristic of 2 or 3 parallel ending ridges... but one could even question for those examples whether an angle of about a 100 degrees is small enough to make any associations at all with a comb).

So Anand's example is clearly most similar to the normal arch example no.116 (and it also has characteristics similar to what is seen in examples no.117 and no.118). And thus there is no basis to speak of a 'vestigial comb'... because that would probably require the presence of various characteristics that are seen in figure no. 119 and no.120 - but in Anand's example both the sharp angle + the presence of 3 parallel abruptly ending ridges ridges are missing... and thus any association between Anand's example with a 'comb' is basically a pure fantasy because by fact there are no characteristics at all which are seen in a 'comb'.




EDIT: PS. In the FBI perspective example no. 143 (see below) could serve as showing characteristics that can be associated with a comb (including mulltiple paralllel ridges that connect likewisely under a sharp angle to a line which has clearly a different direction than those incoming ridges).




However... it is important not to confuse the phenomenon of a 'comb' with the phenomena 'cushioning' (cusp) [Penrose, 1965] / 'ridge multiplication' / 'fan' [(Cummins and Midlo, 1953) ] (which are basically 3 synonyms), because Schaumann & Alter clearly describe in their work 'Dermatoglyphics in Medical Disorders' that 'ridge multiplication' in the interdigital areas is considered as normal and is therefore recognized as an open field (page 43):

"Some increase in the number of ridges occurs where the interdigital area widens between the triradii. In addition to the more of less uniform increase in ridges usually found, a locally concentrated ridge multiplication (M) can occasionally be observed. This configuration is also considered an open field."

(And for exactly the same reason a 'cusp' or 'fan' is thus also recognized as an open field because a 'cusp' is basically a... and thus should not be associated with a 'vestigial pattern')


Last edited by Martijn (admin) on Wed May 08, 2013 1:46 pm; edited 4 times in total (Reason for editing : PS added)

___________________________________________
sunny

Martijn van Mensvoort
Hand researcher & psychologist in The Netherlands (Holland)
Presents: Multi-Perspective Palm Reading + the Global Palm Reading Network
avatar
Martijn (admin)
Admin

Posts : 5208
Join date : 2010-07-23
Location : The Netherlands

http://www.handresearch.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Martijn (admin) on Wed May 08, 2013 2:06 pm

Patti wrote:"Vestiges are conspicuous local disarrangements of ridges, not conforming to the definition of a true pattern but suggesting an approach toward the construction of a pattern. A vestige may be a group of sharply converging ridges, ellipsoidal in shape if convergences occur in both extremities, or a group of straight parallel ridges forming a distinctive field within a zone of ridges of different course." Cummins & Midlo page 106

Patti wrote:

I think the appearance of a vestige is even more visible in this image.

One shouldn't make a "mountain out of a molehill" and the vestige is just a molehill. There are no hard core rules as it can even be something that has the appearance of a pattern, but isn't. Cummins & Midlo list several possibilites, these qualities are not expected to be found in all vestiges. It doesn't have to conform to rules at all - that's the whole point, it looks like a pattern but doesn't fit the rules for the pattern.

What Anand calls a "shape" is what Cummins and Midlo call a "conspicuous local disarrangement of ridges". It's obvious that there is a convergence of ridges in a small area. This is what Loesch refers to as a "cusp" ("Quantitative Dermatoglyphics" Loesch) a fanning of ridges that has a relationship to both the triradius and loop formations. That alone can make it a vestige according to Cummins & Midlo.

I'm sticking with my first response. It looks like a vestige leaning towards a comb.

I see where Loesch describes the 'cusp' but nothing about a vestige. Can you quote from your source?

From Penrose "An area without a loop or triradius is known as an arch on the finger tip or an arc on the palm or sole. Such a region may carry markings that are not regarded as true patterns, such as fan or ladder formations, and these are sometimes separately recorded in descriptions, especially on the area at the base of the thumb." ("Dermatoglyphics and Medicine" Lionel S. Penrose)

The 'bee' is more common on the upper thenar mount, but this sort of configuration we are looking at here, and the comb, are more commonly found in the interdigital area between the ring and little fingers.

Beginner's mistakes? Laughing Seems you were the one who was unfamiliar with the vestige (beyond the 'musical bee') as you seem to be aware of them from reading text rather than practical experience.


My dispute regarding Patti's analysis is basically focussed on the fact that in the literature about dermatoglyphics the phenomena of 'fans', 'cusps' or 'ridge multiplications' (3 synonyms which are related to converging- and/or diverging ridges) are all recognized as manifestations inside OPEN FIELDS.

The aspect of the synonyms is explicitly illustrated inside the work of L.D. Sanghvi (1974) who wrote:

"A fan or multiplication (Cummins and Midlo, 1953) or cusp (Penrose, 1965a,b) is a converging or diverging system of ridges which produce multiplication"

And the fact that those synonyms are considered as OPEN FIELDS is illustrated inside the work of Schaumann & Alter (1976), who wrote on page 43:

"Some increase in the number of ridges occurs where the interdigital area widens between the triradii. In addition to the more of less uniform increase in ridges usually found, a locally concentrated ridge multiplication (M) can occasionally be observed. This configuration is also considered an open field."


And thus it is now very clear for me how Patti incorrectly associated those patterns with vestigial patterns (see the red words in the 2nd quote above)... because her association regarding a vestigial variant of comb appears to be the direct result of that she has misread/underestimated the implications of the word 'sharply' inside the Cummins & Midlo passage that see has quoted (see first quote above).

This implicates that the phenomenon which Patti described in her third picture (see below) is actually just an example of 'ridge multiplication' inside an open field... and her use of the word 'vestige' inside that picture is therefore a fundamental mistake.




PS. By the way, the aspect which I described in a much earlier post of mine as a 'beginner's mistake' only related to the aspect of crossing ridges inside Patti's 2nd picture (not illustrated here); I wouldn't call her fundamental mistake here as such... because obviously we are talking here about advanced stuff - which requires careful reading in order to understand things properly (especially in terms of angles between ridge fields).

___________________________________________
sunny

Martijn van Mensvoort
Hand researcher & psychologist in The Netherlands (Holland)
Presents: Multi-Perspective Palm Reading + the Global Palm Reading Network
avatar
Martijn (admin)
Admin

Posts : 5208
Join date : 2010-07-23
Location : The Netherlands

http://www.handresearch.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  anand_palm on Wed May 08, 2013 4:17 pm

Hello Sue

Thanks for the completing the discussion by giving meaning to such kind of grey area

Martijn

First of all the person who took the intiative to mention about vestige comb on the pattern mentioned is patti so definitely from that point of view she needs to be given credit. Also lot of the technical discussion on this front is added by the arguments between you and patti, otherwise these discussion would not go a long way.

To conclude you would actually need cummins, mildo and other experts who have written the book and ofcourse please remember research progresses only through looking at various types of observation and books cannot encompass all the types, in such cases people like patti who have read hands much more than you and me should be given due preference and weightage. Having said this patti with her background on hand reading and having a wide base in dermatoglyphics would be an appropriate choice as such a combination is difficult to get. A true visionary if at all there is should realise the importance of this and add value and be patient to achieve the overall objective.

There are different approaches of arguing I felt you have taken an opposite stance against patti. But that is not an argument at all. It is just thinghs cannot be accepted when somebody has mentioned an important point. I think in the long run you have higher chance of losing out capable people, partly because such kinds of topic and other contribution in this forum have been provided by patti significantly. Ofocurse that is your way.

Also in life books alone cannot be used as a proving somethingh, there is also experience, intuition and observation which are far more powerful than just books alone, but that cannot be got or bought. Somethingh you have to ponder about.

Please note I have nothing against you, it is just that whatever I have observed is what iam concluding about. Having said this, thanks for your effort in justifying your stance is right and from your point is an arch pattern. But from point of view it is still a vestige towards a comb.Iam still not convinced. As I mentioned let all experts conclude, you are not the only researcher.

It is also sad that in the topic created by me such kind of thinghs has happened and the discussion has led to such kind of drastic measures, if somebody has not replied does not mean you have to take a drastic measure, I think that shows impatience and personally martijn you have not at all thanked patti for the efforts she has put in this forum and her contribution. Iam not here to say you have to thank, but all iam saying you are not getting a complete view from this perspective, just somethingh you have felt of accusation and you have used to stop this healthy discussion is not sportsmanship spirit. It shows you have lost and usually when somebody is cornered they used some stratetegy to attack and in this case you have taken drastic measures.

There is saying one who is patient will rule the world, but I don't see that with you.

The unfortunate thingh about the English language is that it gives a lot of room for interpretation through which some get benefit and some do not, just kidding lawyers catch on these thinghs and argue in a court. Iam not sure which one are you.



Thanks
Anand

avatar
anand_palm

Posts : 393
Join date : 2010-11-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Martijn (admin) on Wed May 08, 2013 6:09 pm


Hi Anand,

Since you mentioned: "Iam still not convinced", I would welcome you to start sharing the details of your observations regarding the individual ridges, because then I can better understand the origins of your doubts.

Can you point out where your doubt is exactly regarding what you see in your example?


wave

___________________________________________
sunny

Martijn van Mensvoort
Hand researcher & psychologist in The Netherlands (Holland)
Presents: Multi-Perspective Palm Reading + the Global Palm Reading Network
avatar
Martijn (admin)
Admin

Posts : 5208
Join date : 2010-07-23
Location : The Netherlands

http://www.handresearch.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Lynn on Tue May 14, 2013 1:06 am

I have been away since 24th April and have followed this discussion when possible from slow internet connections in Turkey, tho I haven't yet been able to view the pictures and links.

In response to people who privately wondered about my thoughts on this - whilst I am unable to comment on the technicalities of the dermatoglyphics until I have read all the literature, links & pictures, I cannot (personally & as co-moderator) support Martijn's "drastic action" in suspending Patti's membership on this discussion, nor in continuing this discussion whilst Patti does not have any right of reply. Sorry, I think the 'drastic action' has not been publically specified before, but many regular members have become aware what happened. Please be assured that many discussions are happening "behind the scenes". I really hope we can resolve the situation.

___________________________________________
Lynn
www.handanalysis.co.uk
avatar
Lynn

Posts : 2408
Join date : 2010-07-24
Location : Devon, England

http://www.handanalysis.co.uk

Back to top Go down

Re: Is this a comb pattern or no pattern in mercury mount

Post  Martijn (admin) on Tue May 14, 2013 11:50 am


My decision to put Patti's forum account on inactive is not just based on the developments inside this topic; a month ago I had already made the same step based on previous discussions.

(That first step was also not just based on a single discussion either... because it resulted from a pattern in preceeding discussions where I noticed how Patti started avoiding to agree with me about any significant detail at all... sometimes even with the use of 'political arguments' - for example by describing in the thumb discussion that she could not agree with me about the anatomic point of view because she expected that I was setting up some kind of 'trick' ... which reminded me about the Walt Disney discussion 2 years ago where Patti basically started questioning my discussion motives by suggesting that I had acted like some kind of magician.)


In the present topic I noticed that Patti is hiding behind arbitrary arguments... combined with unspecified accusations suggesting that I had misunderstood and/or misred things; this combination became for me the trigger to put and end to this proces.

(E.g. Patti suggested that subjective interpretation is allowed for the 'vestige' and she also suggested that the definition of a vestige is 'vague'; however, Cummins & Midlo have clearly described that the assessment should get focussed on "conspicuous" changes in ridge field direction... which indicates that there is no solid ground to make such assumptions at all, because that would kind of implicate that fingerprint interpretation by principle had became a science build on subjective interpretations - while the FBI approach demonstrates that this is not the case at all because every single obvious ridge detail matters. And even though Patti described herself inside this topic twice that she noticed that there is an obvious 'cusp' inside Anand's example... in our email conversation "behind the scenes" Patti refused to agree with me about that the 'cusp' basically represents the only obvious configuration type inside Anand's example. Rather remarkable in the perspective of the fact that Patti described herself inside two posts of this discussion that the presence of the 'cusp' is "obvious" for her, because she never did this for any other aspect of Anand's example at all. However, she made those points before I presented the proof from the literature showing that any 'cusp / fan / ridge multiplication / converging or diverging ridges' should actually be associated with an OPEN FIELD ... and thus not with a 'vestige'! So, even while Patti wrote forum posts that appear to confirm my observation that the 'cusp' is the only obvious configuration inside Anand's example... in the email conversation Patti refused to acknowledge this - which illustrates how Patti is now hiding behind arbitrary arguments about Anand's example... by not focussing on the obvious ridge details seen inside Anand's example. By the way, her series of 4 illustrations based on only one of Anand's two pictures also do not show evidence that Patti used any observations regarding the obvious ridge details at all in order to back her assessment... because those 4 illustrations also do not describe a consistent assessment of the ridge details, and I could even describe Patti's use of 4 orange ridge in her first picture as misleading because it falsely suggests that the orange ridges approach the green ridge parts under a sharp angle... while in all 4 cases there are actually only ridges that have a completely normal curvation indicating that the orange and green ridge parts actually represent a single ridge.)


PS. Somewhere inside the email conversation between Patti & me I was informed by Patti that she has shared the email conversation with others (even though we both already had Lynn copied in); Patti didn't ask me permission to share my emails with other... nor did she inform me who was copied in... nor did she made any attempt to ask me for an explanation regarding on what grounds I made my decision to put her forum account on inactive - which is basically the result of a 2 year lasting pattern of suggestive accusations that she continued to build on arbitrary arguments.

(I am willing to further explain & substantiate my decision via PM)

___________________________________________
sunny

Martijn van Mensvoort
Hand researcher & psychologist in The Netherlands (Holland)
Presents: Multi-Perspective Palm Reading + the Global Palm Reading Network
avatar
Martijn (admin)
Admin

Posts : 5208
Join date : 2010-07-23
Location : The Netherlands

http://www.handresearch.com

Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum