Re: Intro to 5 element chirology

**Lynn** Wed Jul 18, 2012 7:13 pm

Patti wrote:Peter West in "The Complete Illustrated Guide to Palmistry" took another approach. He describes the various systems of hand shape and lets you decide, if the hand doesn't fit in one system - try another. I agree with his comment that the 4 elements approach is nicely condensed but too narrow and doesn't allow for variations within the hand. Which is my argument as well.

I disagree Patti. The elemental approach allows for all variations within the hand! Here we are just talking about basic handshape. But as I said it's like doing a jigsaw, all other aspects of the handshape and all other parts of the hand can also be assessed via elemental methods.

**Martijn (admin)** Wed Jul 18, 2012 11:45 pm

Well... with the help of Lori Reid's examples I think I have been able to make a huge step ahead!

And I never thought that this quest would result in anything like is seen in the picture below, but it looks to me that the 'hand shape axes' (looks like this is going to be the new essential concept that I would like to propose for adoption) pretty accurately and precisely describe where the four hand shapes are typically found in the perspective of the finger length ratios.

By the way, the picture includes a fascinating element... because for me it is quite surprising to see how the mid-point of the 4 axes is found at the finger length location: 0.8 for hand length + 1.0 for hand breadth.

NOTICE: The purple lines resulted from the narrow zones between the 4 groups, and the crossing point of these purple lines represent the starting point of the 4 axes. And each of the 4 axes are drawn from the midpoint through the average location (see the buttons: E, F, A, and W) of the 4 examples that Gettings, Reid, Fincham & Hirsch have presented for each hand shape.

Lynn & Patti... I hope you will enjoy to see this new result as much as I did! happy move

(The leading principle behind these 4 axes is quite easy to understand: when the hand ratios for a person are positioned close to one of the axes... likely that axis represent the hands shape. And it looks like that when the coordinates get further away from the starting point of the 4 axes, the hand shape can probably be described as more 'pure')

Intro to 5 element chirology - Page 5 Finger-length-variations-hand-shapes-axes

Intro to 5 element chirology - Page 5 Finger-length-variations-hand-shapes-axes

**Martijn (admin)** Wed Jul 18, 2012 11:54 pm

By the way... maybe we can now even see which of the 4 authors presented the best examples.

Interesting to see that Jennifer's buttons (no.4) are all found positioned at the 4 axes!

**Lynn** Thu Jul 19, 2012 12:06 am

Martijn said -

Because now I
realize that not only the work of Gettings fits perfectly with the
suggestions that I found in the 'format' that I am working on, also
some fundamental issues described by Dukes regarding the individual hand
shapes confirm that finger length versus palm width is just as
important as finger length versus palm length. Only, I guess it requires
some thinking 'out of the box' in order to understand this fundamental
issue.

Does it help if I give you the combination hand shapes? Looking at length of earth finger compared to width of hand enables you to differentiate between different types of fire combination hands.(remember we measure it across the centre of the palm).

standard hand shapes -
classic fire hand proportions - 10cm palm length, 8 cm palm width, 7.5 cm earth finger.
Air hands generally have a larger square palm than earth hands.

combinations -
Fire/Earth - earth finger is shorter than width of palm. Palm is wider than you would expect in standard fire hand (squarer), earth finger is still 75% length of palm, but same as width of palm.
Fire/Air - Oblong palm, wider than standard fire (square-ish). Earth finger is more than 75% length of palm but less than 85%. generally around 82%. Earth finger is about the same length as width of palm or slightly longer. (or fire /air can be fire palm shape but slightly longer fingers than standard fire hand)
Fire/Water - palm is slightly narrower than you'd expect in a fire hand, earth finger is still 75% length of palm but same as width of palm. OR standard fire palm with medium fingers 80% length of palm.
Earth/Air - it was argued that earth/air combination doesn't exist, but it does! square palm with fingers around 80% length of palm.

(it's late, I hope I got this right!)

**Martijn (admin)** Thu Jul 19, 2012 12:28 am

Lynn wrote:Martijn said -
Because now I
realize that not only the work of Gettings fits perfectly with the
suggestions that I found in the 'format' that I am working on, also
some fundamental issues described by Dukes regarding the individual hand
shapes confirm that finger length versus palm width is just as
important as finger length versus palm length. Only, I guess it requires
some thinking 'out of the box' in order to understand this fundamental
issue.

Does it help if I give you the combination hand shapes? Looking at length of earth finger compared to width of hand enables you to differentiate between different types of fire combination hands.(remember we measure it across the centre of the palm).

standard hand shapes -
classic fire hand proportions - 10cm palm length, 8 cm palm width, 7.5 cm earth finger.
Air hands generally have a larger square palm than earth hands.

...

Thanks Lynn!

By the way... guess what Lynn? In my new picture the coordinates for the large 'F' button (which represents the average of the 4 fire hand shape examples presented by the authors)... are not far away from the coordinaties resulting from the 'classic fire hand proportions' that you just described.

(The coordinates resulting from the proportions that you described for the typical fire hand are: 7.5 / 8 = 0.94 and 7.5 / 10 = 0.75; while in my notes the coordinates of the (average) F-button are: 0.97 and 0.73).

I hope this will help you recognize and understand that my new pictures now sort of confirm your conclusions regarding the key-features of the classic fire hand!

Thinking about this a little more... maybe the E, A and W button could very well turn out to be a good representive as well for the typical dimensions of in respective an earth hand, an air hand, and a water hand.

Does this makes sense for you as well?

Do you have likewise coordinates for the other hand types as well? For, it would be very interesting to compare them with the results that I found.

**Lynn** Thu Jul 19, 2012 12:30 am

Martijn (admin) wrote:
Well... with the help of Lori Reid's examples I think I have been able to make a huge step ahead! .....

And I never thought that this quest would result in anything like is seen in the picture below, but it looks to me that the 'hand shape axes' (looks like this is going to be the new essential concept that I would like to propose for adoption) pretty accurately and precisely describe where the four hand shapes are typically found in the perspective of the finger length ratios.

By the way, the picture includes a fascinating element... because for me it is quite surprising to see how the mid-point of the 4 axes is found at the finger length location: 0.8 for hand length + 1.0 for hand breadth.......
<snip>

That's interesting. I plotted some handprints yesterday, and there was a distinct line of handshapes going up the graph between 1 and 1.01 on the finger length vs palm
breadth. I was surprised at what I saw, almost a straight line going up the graph....

1st is finger length vs palm width, 2nd is finger length vs palm length:

1, 0.75 - fire/water combination
1.01, 0.75 fire/water combination
1, 0.8 - Fire/Air combination
1.01, 0.82 - water
1, 0.87 - air
1.01, 0.92 - air

**Martijn (admin)** Thu Jul 19, 2012 12:48 am

Lynn wrote:
Martijn (admin) wrote:
Well... with the help of Lori Reid's examples I think I have been able to make a huge step ahead! .....

And I never thought that this quest would result in anything like is seen in the picture below, but it looks to me that the 'hand shape axes' (looks like this is going to be the new essential concept that I would like to propose for adoption) pretty accurately and precisely describe where the four hand shapes are typically found in the perspective of the finger length ratios.

By the way, the picture includes a fascinating element... because for me it is quite surprising to see how the mid-point of the 4 axes is found at the finger length location: 0.8 for hand length + 1.0 for hand breadth.......
<snip>

That's interesting. I plotted some handprints yesterday, and there was a distinct line of handshapes going up the graph between 1 and 1.01 on the finger length vs palm
breadth. I was surprised at what I saw, almost a straight line going up the graph....

1st is finger length vs palm width, 2nd is finger length vs palm length:

1, 0.75 - fire/water combination
1.01, 0.75 fire/water combination
1, 0.8 - Fire/Air combination
1.01, 0.82 - water
1, 0.87 - air
1.01, 0.92 - air

Your water and air examples are on the axes that I presented for those hands in the new picture. And your combi-examples are sort of located where one can expect them according the axes: between the axes.

By the way, your fire-air combination is quite fascinating: because those coordinates are found at the starting point of the axes... and this perfectly makes sense: for, those 'opposite' elements can not be expected to show up elsewhere (when assuming that the axes are correct).

Sounds to me that we sort of both arrived at the same fascinating discovery Lynn! flower

**Lynn** Thu Jul 19, 2012 12:58 am

Sounds to me that we sort of both arrived at the same fascinating discovery Lynn!

Intro to 5 element chirology - Page 5 510804

I always told you that 5 element hand analysis was fascinating! Laughing

Patti Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:07 am

So basically you have found agreement now that you have Lori's sample?

**Lynn** Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:10 am

here are some others I plotted. How do these fit in? (sorry I didn't take note of where I got the hand prints from, some of them could be the same ones you used from the books)

1st is finger length vs palm width, 2nd is finger length vs palm length:

0.77, 0.7 - earth/fire
0.81, 0.7 - earth
0.82, 0.77 - earth
0.83, 0.75 - earth/fire
0.9, 0.71 - fire
0.93, 0.75 - fire
1.105, 0.855 (did I plot this in the right place / read the graph right? strange numbers!) - water

Patti Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:11 am

Martijn, could you add Lynn as Example 5 so we can see on the chart how what she is sharing relates to the others. I expected Lori to be #4 but you said that you made Jennifer #4. Could you also give a legend to your chart?

Thanks!

(nevermind on the legend - I see it at the top lol!

)

**Lynn** Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:11 am

Patti wrote: So basically you have found agreement now that you have Lori's sample?

good point Patti. How did Lori's examples help you Martijn? (they look like pretty classic handshapes to me)

Patti Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:17 am

by the way Martijn, axes better fits the plural of axe which is kind of like a hatchet and chops things up. I think you mean axis? But then again your axes might be cutting the elements at an axis. Wink

**Martijn (admin)** Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:38 am

Patti wrote:Martijn, could you add Lynn as Example 5 so we can see on the chart how what she is sharing relates to the others. I expected Lori to be #4 but you said that you made Jennifer #4. Could you also give a legend to your chart?

(nevermind on the legend - I see it at the top )

Patti, regarding the legend... it is available in the picture - see at the right side of the hand.

Regarding adding Lynn to the chart, I prefer to continue working here with materials that have been published (I prefer to avoid hat the result might get an obscure character when unknown examples get included etc. - I hope you understand).

**Martijn (admin)** Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:49 am

Lynn wrote:
Patti wrote: So basically you have found agreement now that you have Lori's sample?
good point Patti. How did Lori's examples help you Martijn? (they look like pretty classic handshapes to me)

Actually Lynn, you should now be able to 'read' the answer from the picture!

But I guess... maybe.... Lori's examples sort of gave more 'direction' to the earth-axis and fire-axis; which probably helped me to find my 'eureka' moment regarding how to make a clear presentation for these materials. But I think the other hands have had likewise weight in this process.

So, hand examples from another book might have had the same result. Because, Lori's examples only had a significant influence on the direction of the axis for 'fire hand shape'.

Is that the answer you were looking for?

**Martijn (admin)** Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:54 am

Patti wrote:by the way Martijn, axes better fits the plural of axe which is kind of like a hatchet and chops things up. I think you mean axis? But then again your axes might be cutting the elements at an axis.

Patti, I checked the word 'axes' via google before using them: in discussions about plotting the words 'one axis' and 'two axes' are being used - see for example:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2300629/plotting-axes-with-different-scales-for-one-data-set-in-r

Do you have any info available to illustrate your point?

**Martijn (admin)** Thu Jul 19, 2012 2:00 am

Lynn wrote:here are some others I plotted. How do these fit in? (sorry I didn't take note of where I got the hand prints from, some of them could be the same ones you used from the books)

1st is finger length vs palm width, 2nd is finger length vs palm length:

0.77, 0.7 - earth/fire
0.81, 0.7 - earth
0.82, 0.77 - earth
0.83, 0.75 - earth/fire
0.9, 0.71 - fire
0.93, 0.75 - fire
1.105, 0.855 (did I plot this in the right place / read the graph right? strange numbers!) - water

Ha...! Now that the hand shape axes are available, it becomes quite easy for me to find out whether there could be some kind of a 'miss-hit' in your list:

Lynn, I would say that the red one above ... is probably 'earth'. Could that possibly be a better option?

PS. Your other examples perfectly make sense in the perspective of the axes - I think this model works very well.

Patti Thu Jul 19, 2012 2:20 am

Well actually you are correct, apparently axes is plural for axis:

http://www.mathopenref.com/axis.html

**tap** Thu Jul 19, 2012 2:46 am

I think there is one more discrepancy. scratch

Lynn said

That's interesting. I plotted some handprints yesterday, and there was a distinct line of handshapes going up the graph between 1 and 1.01 on the finger length vs palm
breadth. I was surprised at what I saw, almost a straight line going up the graph....

1st is finger length vs palm width, 2nd is finger length vs palm length:

1, 0.75 - fire/water combination
1.01, 0.75 fire/water combination
1, 0.8 - Fire/Air combination
1.01, 0.82 - water
1, 0.87 - air
1.01, 0.92 - air

**Martijn (admin)** Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:31 am

tap wrote:I think there is one more discrepancy.

Lynn said

That's interesting. I plotted some handprints yesterday, and there was a distinct line of handshapes going up the graph between 1 and 1.01 on the finger length vs palm
breadth. I was surprised at what I saw, almost a straight line going up the graph....

1st is finger length vs palm width, 2nd is finger length vs palm length:

1, 0.75 - fire/water combination
1.01, 0.75 fire/water combination
1, 0.8 - Fire/Air combination
1.01, 0.82 - water
1, 0.87 - air
1.01, 0.92 - air

Hi Tap,

Sorry, I don't see much of a problem regarding those first 2 examples, because they are clearly both in between the fire axis and the water axis.

Quite a different situation compared to Lynn's '0.83, 0.75 - earth/fire' example... because those coordinates are very close to the earth axis + at a very large distance from the fire axis.

See the difference?

**Martijn (admin)** Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:32 am

Patti wrote:Well actually you are correct, apparently axes is plural for axis:

http://www.mathopenref.com/axis.html

**tap** Thu Jul 19, 2012 12:15 pm

Thanks Martijn

Okay I am pretty sure I got it now. So the hand is only a "pure" type/shape if the measurements and ratios fall on the axis directly. All the area in between the colored arrows is a mix of hand type. Most will be mixed hand shapes sunny

**Martijn (admin)** Thu Jul 19, 2012 12:24 pm

tap wrote:Thanks Martijn

Okay I am pretty sure I got it now. So the hand is only a "pure" type/shape if the measurements and ratios fall on the axis directly. All the area in between the colored arrows is a mix of hand type. Most will be mixed hand shapes

Yes Tap, exactly!

When the hands are inside the areas between the axes, then it requires a closer look regarding the distances towards the 2 axes involved.

(Notice: the discussion about hand shapes is still 'in process', so in time I might get at a point to decide that it might be necessary to chance the position of the axes at least a little bit)

**tap** Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:58 pm

Martijn

(Notice: the discussion about hand shapes is still 'in process', so in time I might get at a point to decide that it might be necessary to chance the position of the axes at least a little bit)

I am really a novice at the 5 element hand reading, but the chart does look somewhat off due to the fact that the "average" male and female marks are below the "center" of the chart.

PS I guess air hand is just not as common.

**Martijn (admin)** Thu Jul 19, 2012 2:54 pm

tap wrote:Martijn

(Notice: the discussion about hand shapes is still 'in process', so in time I might get at a point to decide that it might be necessary to chance the position of the axes at least a little bit)

I am really a novice at the 5 element hand reading, but the chart does look somewhat off due to the fact that the "average" male and female marks are below the "center" of the chart.

PS I guess air hand is just not as common.

Yes Tap, your observation is correct... but that relates directly to how the elemental hand shapes are defined. So, this is not an issue regarding the position of the hand shape axes.

Actually, I can explain this by detail:

For, for example one of the early elemental experts (Dukes) used the following description:

"If the hand has fingers that are longer than the palm..." and "If fingers are shorter...".

This implicates that in the elemental approach (far) most people typically are classified as belonging in the 'short fingers' category - because less than 1% of people have fingers that are longer than the palm.

(However, I should add here that later the descriptions for long fingers were improved with more realistic guidelines)

More important: based on this criterium one can expect 'fire hand shape' (short fingers + large long palm) and 'earth hand shape' (short fingers + squarish palm) to be most cost common.

However, since squarish palms are not very common... this explains why the 'fire hand shape' is generally most common (especially in Europe & the US - I already have planned to present a chart describing the average finger ratios for various countries).

Also, please be aware that the finger coordinates for average males and females is also very close to the 'neutral zone' - where the 4 hand shape axes start!

Tap, I hope this explains enough why the average for males and females are found located close to the fire hand shape axis?

wave

Sponsored content