| Author | Post |
|---|
hansi
Gold Member
| Joined: | Thu Apr 19th, 2007 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 428 |
| Your Age: | | | Palmistry Skills: | | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 08:33 pm |
|
How do we measure the phalanges (from what point) when there are double lines showing the crease of the second phalange (like this in case)
Is it the blue line, black line or pink line? (from bottom line , middle or top of the line)
Also, what is the significance of having double lined phalange demarcation? (like the circled one) I have seen many of those including my hand where there are double lined demarcations for the middle portion of the finger. Also, most of the times on the lower portion of the finger (attached to the palm) but hardly on the first phalange portion of the finger.
Attached Image (viewed 161 times):
 Last edited on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 08:35 pm by hansi
|
Helen B
PI Registered Member
| Joined: | Sun Mar 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | New Jersey USA |
| Posts: | 205 |
| Your Age: | 26 - 35 | | Palmistry Skills: | Elementary | | Your current mood: | life is worth living |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 08:46 pm |
|
Hi Hansi,
Good quesion 
i have dificulties measuring phalanges on the THUMB. Any suggestions?
Last edited on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 08:47 pm by Helen B
|
Lynn
Gold Member
| Joined: | Sun Apr 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | Torquay, Devon, United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 400 |
| Your Age: | 46 - 55 | | Palmistry Skills: | Professional | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 11:50 pm |
|
hi Hansi
I was taught to measure the black line. Then for the phalanx below, start from the lower of the double creases down to the next crease. The bit in between the two phalanges (from base of black line to base of pink line) being a space to allow the knuckle to bend, and counted as 'no man's land'. It is "normal" for there to be a double crease at the junction of 2nd & 3rd phalanges, and just one crease where the top & 2nd join, tho occasionally you find an extra crease at these junctions.
I am not sure about this, but wonder if the bigger the gap in 'no man's land', the longer it takes for transference of info, such as knotted knuckles who think about all the details before acting, whereas smooth knuckles are more impulsive & instinctive and just 'get on with it'. Tho I have no proof that knotted knuckles have a wider gap, it's an idea that just came to me!
Last edited on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 11:53 pm by Lynn
|
Helen B
PI Registered Member
| Joined: | Sun Mar 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | New Jersey USA |
| Posts: | 205 |
| Your Age: | 26 - 35 | | Palmistry Skills: | Elementary | | Your current mood: | life is worth living |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 02:24 am |
|
Lynn wrote:
"...just one crease where the top & 2nd join, tho occasionally you find an extra crease at these junctions."
I have this extra crease on middle and ring fingers on both hands, however it is going only half way 
I can attach pictures if anyone is interested.
|
hand_research
Gold Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | Eindhoven, Netherlands |
| Posts: | 483 |
| Your Age: | 26 - 35 | | Palmistry Skills: | Professional | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 02:54 am |
|
Lynn wrote: hi Hansi
I was taught to measure the black line. Then for the phalanx below, start from the lower of the double creases down to the next crease. The bit in between the two phalanges (from base of black line to base of pink line) being a space to allow the knuckle to bend, and counted as 'no man's land'. It is "normal" for there to be a double crease at the junction of 2nd & 3rd phalanges, and just one crease where the top & 2nd join, tho occasionally you find an extra crease at these junctions.
I am not sure about this, but wonder if the bigger the gap in 'no man's land', the longer it takes for transference of info, such as knotted knuckles who think about all the details before acting, whereas smooth knuckles are more impulsive & instinctive and just 'get on with it'. Tho I have no proof that knotted knuckles have a wider gap, it's an idea that just came to me!
Hansi ... excellent question!
But I am afraid that on this topic ... many people will disagree on many aspects of your question.
For example:
Lynn, I have double creases on all fingers where 'the top and the 2th join'. Helen said she has them on a few fingers, and I am quite sure that many people have these double creases on at least one finger (and frequently ALL fingers).
Actually, I think it is often quite hard to 'measure' the exact length of individual phalanges because these 'interphalangal creases' often have irregular features. In many hands you will find overlapping creases, which makes it quite impossible to measure the exact length of the phalanges.
Hansi, I think your photo is a perfect illustration for the problems which arise when you start measuring the length of individual phalanges!!!
Last edited on Fri Jul 25th, 2008 02:55 am by hand_research
____________________
http://www.handresearch.com
|
Sue Compton
PI Admin
| Joined: | Sun Jun 5th, 2005 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 3868 |
| Your Age: | 46 - 55 | | Palmistry Skills: | Professional | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 06:59 am |
|
Hi
Looking at the fingers from the inside of the palm side, there always appears to be one, two or even three lines dividing up the individual phalanges, making the taking of measurements difficult.
However, if you look to the side of each finger, you will see that even multiple lines actually merge into one single line, allowing for a more accurate measurement.
Sue
____________________
http://www.palmistryinternational.com
|
Lynn
Gold Member
| Joined: | Sun Apr 15th, 2007 |
| Location: | Torquay, Devon, United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 400 |
| Your Age: | 46 - 55 | | Palmistry Skills: | Professional | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 10:02 am |
|
Yes you are right to correct me. I shouldn't write messages when I am tired!
The main thing I was trying to convey to hansi is that it is "normal" for there to be a double crease at the junction of 2nd & 3rd phalanges.
I should then have said - Many people have just one crease where the top & 2nd phalanges join. Tho often there are extra creases (or half way creases like Helen's) at all the phalanx junctions.
Last edited on Fri Jul 25th, 2008 10:04 am by Lynn
|
hand_research
Gold Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | Eindhoven, Netherlands |
| Posts: | 483 |
| Your Age: | 26 - 35 | | Palmistry Skills: | Professional | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 11:33 am |
|
Lynn, thanks for the confirmation! But I do think that you've made a very relevant point: since I think as well that often there is a difference between the number of creases at the upper- and the lower joints! (frequently the number is lower at the upper joint).
Sue, for sure: that is an interesting thought! But looking at my own hands: especially on my little finger ... looking at the sides doesn't solve the problem at all: at both sides of my little fingers I have multiple creases. But I can also report that your suggestion does kind of solve the problem on my index fingers!
Hansi, like I noticed before: in the world of palmistry there is simply no common method to measure the individual phalanges. Some books present a method for measuring the phalanges is presented ... without providing answers to all the practical problems with the numberous interdigital creases!
By the way, in medics X-rays are being used to measure the phalanges (the hand bones) ... but using X-rays you will usually find on each finger (in each person) that this distal bone is the shortest, and that the lower bone is always the longest.
____________________
http://www.handresearch.com
|
hansi
Gold Member
| Joined: | Thu Apr 19th, 2007 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 428 |
| Your Age: | | | Palmistry Skills: | | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 12:46 pm |
|
Thanks Martijn, Sue, Lynn, Helen for your valuable inputs.
So, according to Sue - it would be the lower crease that would be accounted to measure because when I look at the sides - its the lower crease that is actually seen while the upper crease is just the 'oval' shape formation on the lower crease.
That makes me to think -
Somewhere on this forum, someone commented on the oval shaped crease on the thumb to 'have a normal family'. I think it was called 'grain of rice' or something not sure. So if there is a 'grain of rice' on the thumb then its a happy family otherwise not..etc.
My question is - if that double crease on the thumb has some significance does Indian palmistry also account on the double creases on the other fingers?
Last edited on Fri Jul 25th, 2008 12:46 pm by hansi
|
Helen B
PI Registered Member
| Joined: | Sun Mar 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | New Jersey USA |
| Posts: | 205 |
| Your Age: | 26 - 35 | | Palmistry Skills: | Elementary | | Your current mood: | life is worth living |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 01:01 pm |
|
Hi,
why cann't we measure finger's phalanges from outside of the hand? It is easy to see the length of each phalanges when bending finger and looking from the side.
Just a thought
|
Vijay Goel
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 29th, 2008 |
| Location: | Jaipur, India |
| Posts: | 65 |
| Your Age: | 26 - 35 | | Palmistry Skills: | Intermediate | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Aug 9th, 2008 06:03 pm |
|
Helen B wrote: Hi,
why cann't we measure finger's phalanges from outside of the hand? It is easy to see the length of each phalanges when bending finger and looking from the side.
Just a thought
I also think that it is very easy to compare the length of phalanges with each other when we observe from back of hand while bending the fingers.
____________________
I am a practicing vedic astrologer and vastu consultant.
Astrology is the science of probabilities not of certainties.
All music is only the sound of His laughter,
All beauty the smile of His passionate bliss;
HARE RAMA KRSNA
|
hand_research
Gold Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | Eindhoven, Netherlands |
| Posts: | 483 |
| Your Age: | 26 - 35 | | Palmistry Skills: | Professional | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Aug 9th, 2008 10:19 pm |
|
Helen B wrote: Hi,
why cann't we measure finger's phalanges from outside of the hand? It is easy to see the length of each phalanges when bending finger and looking from the side.
Just a thought
Hello Helen & Vijay Goel,
Measuring the finger phalanger from the back of the hand will likely get you into likewise AND more problems ... for example: when you consider the phalanges from the back of the hand:
... do you really think it is possible at all to measure the 3th phalange of your fingers from the back of your hand??? 
I think the whole idea of measuring finger phalanges is much more attractive from the perspective of the inner palm ... for only then the length of the 3 phalanges of one finger 'APPEAR' to be of equal length.
But looking at the same finger from the back of the hand (or the X-ray perspective, which I mentioned earlier), will indeed provide you a different 'APPEARANCE'.
By the way, when you start looking from the back of the the hand at any finger, you will usually see that the nail-phalange is the shortest (though it is impossible to measure the 3th phalange) - and X-rays will confirm this observation.
____________________
http://www.handresearch.com
|
Sue Compton
PI Admin
| Joined: | Sun Jun 5th, 2005 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 3868 |
| Your Age: | 46 - 55 | | Palmistry Skills: | Professional | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sun Aug 10th, 2008 02:03 am |
|
It seems to me that the most obvious way to measure the fingers is from the side, because all the creases can be seen clearly, and they all become single creases at some point, making the individual phalange lengths more obvious.
I don't believe there is ever going to be a singularly scientific way of measuring the fingers accurately, just by looking at the outer skin. Perhaps with x ray equipment one can see the bones of the fingers, but is this totally necessary anyway. I have always believed that any minor differences in the individual phalange length are not of the utmost importance. Only when there is a significant difference would I consider any interpretation to be significant.
Sue
____________________
http://www.palmistryinternational.com
|
hand_research
Gold Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | Eindhoven, Netherlands |
| Posts: | 483 |
| Your Age: | 26 - 35 | | Palmistry Skills: | Professional | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sun Aug 10th, 2008 07:41 am |
|
Sue Compton wrote: It seems to me that the most obvious way to measure the fingers is from the side, because all the creases can be seen clearly, and they all become single creases at some point, making the individual phalange lengths more obvious.
I don't believe there is ever going to be a singularly scientific way of measuring the fingers accurately, just by looking at the outer skin. Perhaps with x ray equipment one can see the bones of the fingers, but is this totally necessary anyway. I have always believed that any minor differences in the individual phalange length are not of the utmost importance. Only when there is a significant difference would I consider any interpretation to be significant.
Sue
Thanks for your input Sue, in general: yes I can agree with your comments.
Only regarding the underlined comment I would like to notice that in my earlier comments I already noticed that in (too) many hands this is not the case (in many hands various interphalangeal creases do not become single creases) - so I am not really sure what you're trying to notice regarding that point.
____________________
http://www.handresearch.com
|
Vijay Goel
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 29th, 2008 |
| Location: | Jaipur, India |
| Posts: | 65 |
| Your Age: | 26 - 35 | | Palmistry Skills: | Intermediate | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sun Aug 10th, 2008 11:51 am |
|
hand_research wrot
Only regarding the underlined comment I would like to notice that in my earlier comments I already noticed that in (too) many hands this is not the case (in many hands various interphalangeal creases do not become single creases) - so I am not really sure what you're trying to notice regarding that point.
By bending the fingers and viewed from side, we can clearly see the crease and compare the length of phalanges.
I think it works and if any major difference in there in lenght, we can notice is easily
____________________
I am a practicing vedic astrologer and vastu consultant.
Astrology is the science of probabilities not of certainties.
All music is only the sound of His laughter,
All beauty the smile of His passionate bliss;
HARE RAMA KRSNA
|
hand_research
Gold Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | Eindhoven, Netherlands |
| Posts: | 483 |
| Your Age: | 26 - 35 | | Palmistry Skills: | Professional | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sun Aug 10th, 2008 03:45 pm |
|
Vijay Goel wrote:
By bending the fingers and viewed from side, we can clearly see the crease and compare the length of phalanges.
I think it works and if any major difference in there in lenght, we can notice is easily
Hello Mr. Vijay Goel,
Maybe this is true for your hands. But the problem is that this can not be said for all hands. Again, the major problem is that in many hands you will find multiple interphalangeal lines - which do not always end in 1 single line (bending fingers doesn't solve the problem).
Hansi, Helen, Lynn, Sue & Vijay Goel,
Regarding the finger phalanges ... maybe we can agree that in many cases, we can only make some 'rough estimates' of phalange ratios???
Last edited on Sun Aug 10th, 2008 11:49 pm by hand_research
____________________
http://www.handresearch.com
|
Sue Compton
PI Admin
| Joined: | Sun Jun 5th, 2005 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 3868 |
| Your Age: | 46 - 55 | | Palmistry Skills: | Professional | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sun Aug 10th, 2008 10:23 pm |
|
Hi Martijn
I have to say that in the majority of cases that I have seen, the interphalangeal creases DO end in one single line, when viewed from the side, although I do accept the fact that there may be exceptions.
But I have always believed that minor differences found in the phalange lengths are not generally worthy of note. Only when there are obvious differences is it worth attempting an interpretation.
Would you say that even the very small, minor differences found in the phalange lengths are important?
Sue
____________________
http://www.palmistryinternational.com
|
hand_research
Gold Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | Eindhoven, Netherlands |
| Posts: | 483 |
| Your Age: | 26 - 35 | | Palmistry Skills: | Professional | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sun Aug 10th, 2008 11:46 pm |
|
Sue Compton wrote: Hi Martijn
I have to say that in the majority of cases that I have seen, the interphalangeal creases DO end in one single line (1), when viewed from the side, although I do accept the fact that there may be exceptions.
But I have always believed that minor differences found in the phalange lengths are not generally worthy of note. Only when there are obvious differences is it worth attempting an interpretation (2).
Would you say that even the very small, minor differences found in the phalange lengths are important?
Sue
Hi Sue,
I don't know Sue. I have hardly spend any time studying this aspect of the hand. But looking at my own hands + the photo of Hansi's hand in the first message of this discussion (I observe this problem on all fingers, on all interphalangeal creases between the second and third phalanges), I would so say that from my point of view at this moment I can not confirm your first comment that the interphalangeal creases usually do end in one single line (1).
Sue, can you confirm that you recognize the problem in Hansi's photo as well? (Or could this photo maybe illustrate our different perceptions???).
Last edited on Sun Aug 10th, 2008 11:49 pm by hand_research
____________________
http://www.handresearch.com
|
hand_research
Gold Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | Eindhoven, Netherlands |
| Posts: | 483 |
| Your Age: | 26 - 35 | | Palmistry Skills: | Professional | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Aug 12th, 2008 03:21 am |
|
Hmm ... by the way, regarding the suggestion to use the 'side' ... I think another problem rises here which has not been noticed yet:
Hmm ... actually, which 'side' were you talking about? The 'radial side'? The 'ulnar side'? ... or maybe the average of both???
Or are we allowed to flip coins here??? 
(  From my point of view ... in this discussion I feel like I have dived into a 'swamp', I see no way out)
____________________
http://www.handresearch.com
|
Sue Compton
PI Admin
| Joined: | Sun Jun 5th, 2005 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 3868 |
| Your Age: | 46 - 55 | | Palmistry Skills: | Professional | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Aug 12th, 2008 05:08 am |
|
Well, I would say, the radial side 
I don't think we have dived into a swamp Martijn - although I do think that if we are not careful, we might drown in the scientific analysis of how to make accurate measurements!
I think my main point would be that if there is no signficant difference between the phalangeal lengths, then any minor differences would be reasonably insignificant in the final analysis.
Sue
____________________
http://www.palmistryinternational.com
|
Helen B
PI Registered Member
| Joined: | Sun Mar 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | New Jersey USA |
| Posts: | 205 |
| Your Age: | 26 - 35 | | Palmistry Skills: | Elementary | | Your current mood: | life is worth living |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Aug 12th, 2008 07:12 am |
|
Hi all,
I found a thumb to be the hardest to measure. Can anyone give any advise on it? I am observing thumbs for a months and found that not a lot of people (I am talking about people around me, with who I interact on daily bases) have visually significant different between phalanges.
So far I met only one women who has very short top phalanges on the thumb with very well padded and round tips. One quick glimpse was enough to see difference.
|
Pamelah Landers
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 9th, 2008 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 195 |
| Your Age: | 56 - 65 | | Palmistry Skills: | Professional | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Aug 12th, 2008 08:32 am |
|
This may be a very radical question, but what are you planning to do with the information once you ohave measured the finger sections? I use the info by looking at them to have some insights on focus regarding life purpose and relationships, but I'm not getting too involved in the actual measurements as specifically as you are.
If I see a long section that is also widely formed, that means something different than a short section, but that's about as far as I take it. So I'd like to understand what you are going to do with this information.
Thanks for enlightening me!
____________________
Pamelah Landers, Author
http://www.HandsOnCompany.com
|
Sue Compton
PI Admin
| Joined: | Sun Jun 5th, 2005 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 3868 |
| Your Age: | 46 - 55 | | Palmistry Skills: | Professional | | Your current mood: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
