Michael Hoffman, Feb. 23, 2026
Contents:
- Post-Analysis Reflection on the Message of {branching-message hand shape pairs}
- The Demon Difference: No Finger Shows All 3 Segments (Curled)
- Moving Away from Hand-Shape Pairs; Each Hand Is More Articulate than Realized, via Finger-Segments Inventory
- Summary of hand-shape pairs
- Motivation for this Page
- All My [Y’, YI] or [Y’, Y’I] hand-shape pairs are Error? Actually [Y’I, YI] Shown?
- Test Cases: Mushroom King, Psalter Viewer, {balance scale} Woman; Break Bowman; Threatening/ Relenting Swordsman (Unsheathing/ Sheathing): Quick Assessments Using New, Finger Segment Inventory-Driven Rules
- Mushroom King: [IIIY’, IIIY’]
- Psalter Viewer: [Y’II, IY’I], normed: [Y’II, Y’II]
- {balance scale} Woman: [IY’, YI], normed: [Y’I, YI]
- Break Bowman: [Y’I, Y’II’] or [Y’I, Y’YI’]
- Threatening/ Relenting Swordsman (Unsheathing/ Sheathing): [Y’I, IIY’]
- Guy Above Asp-Dog: [IY, IY’], normed: [YI, Y’I]
- See Also
Post-Analysis Reflection on the Message of {branching-message hand shape pairs}
I’m sure this technique will solve various awkward problems like “why is he holding scroll with bad, closed hand? Sln: maybe closed hand shows all 3 segments of a finger, which means the hand is to be read as Y’I, not simply Y’.
⚰️ Canterbury f107: Lifted from Ossuary by Right Arm, https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f107.item.zoom, https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/canterbury-f107.jpg, https://egodeaththeory.org/2026/01/16/canterbury-f107-lifted-up-from-ossuary-by-right-arm/ —
The {hand mushroom-tree} has 4 cut trunks, so are we to assess his lower hand as 4 cut fingers, or as 3 cut fingers + 3-segment pinkie?? His hand can read as …. Some hands show no finger having all 3 segments; other hands show a pinkie all 3 seg, wrapped around (curled).
3 cut fingers + 1 curled finger. maps still to 4 cut trunks??
What is the trunk-based expression equiv to the finger that has all 3 segments shown (though curled)? middle of trunk, centerline.
Goal of genre: Rebut Y and assert I, with a hand.
This revision of the tentative rules for medieval YI hand-shape theory is a blow against the importance of hand-shape pairs.
There is less sequence activity/ messaging from one hand to the other hand, than I thought.
Each isolated hand is MORE capable than I said a week ago.
The game is to represent via a hand, via which finger segments are shown, the many ways to rebut Y and affirm I.
Not to show a progression of mental models although von Trimberg does that.
My statements here apply to Great Canterbury Psalter (Eadwine), and many other artists.
Not necessarily all artists follow this same rule-set as we extract from Eadwine with his clues and indicators.
I sure have more interp’n options now that I inventory all finger-segments, and list out possible debatable readings to pick from.
A big leap forward in fluency of hand-shape language, in past two days and in the past day, past 12 hours.
I’m better at debating YI form-assignments.
I take more factors into consideration.
The Demon Difference: No Finger Shows All 3 Segments (Curled)
Jesus’ R hand lifting the {rock ossuary} guy is bereft. 3 1-seg fingers + 1 0-seg. finger.
Moving Away from Hand-Shape Pairs; Each Hand Is More Articulate than Realized, via Finger-Segments Inventory
Summary of hand-shape pairs
Each hand is norm’d to start w/ Y then I.
It’s become more arbitrary now which hand to list first, since I seem to be getting rid of notion of progression from one hand to other.
Normize to list Y’ or Y first??
intermediate person thinks “get rid of Y” ie Y’. advanced person comes back to affirming Y, but qualified possibilism-thinking: Y’.
Hard to decide. suppose list Y’ first.
Rule: arbitrary: list the Y’ hand before the Y hand.
[Y’III, Y’III] – Mushroom King
[Y’II, Y’II] – Psalter Viewer
[Y’I, YI] – {balance scale} Woman
[Y’I, Y’II’] – Break Bowman
Rare denial of I.
Denies non-branching Eternalism, to avoid control instability.
The threat recedes, non-branching is cancelled.
[Y’I, Y’II] – Swordsman
Y’II – Close Bowman
[Y’I, YI] – Guy Above Asp-Dog
Motivation for this Page
This is a problem solver because I was I WAS STRUGGLING to interp {balance scale} woman’s lower hand as simply Y’. That’s not a complete message. “I got rid of my old way of thinking.” Better is: Y’ AND I, especially if paired with “both Y and I”. eg: [Y’I, YI] I have said a week ago, this is really nice.
I am trashcanning my notion that the lower hand focuses on your initial state and the upper hand focuses on resulting dual mental model.
A week ago I said of pair of hands, the two hands can either represent:
- one hand = old mental model, other hand = new mental model combo.
- both hands can describe the final dual mental model. compound mental model; integrated possibilism/eternalism thinking.
I now reject the first option (re: reference shapes), and favor ALWAYS the second relation of the two hands.
This represents previous ERRORS, which sucks, but, an advancement in sophistication, which is good.
The first pass never nails the interp’n; always needs fine-tuning.
I looked closer and applied a more detail-driven, scientific, empirical inventory of listing every particular segment of every finger, factoring-in splay and black cut lines.
Goal is greatest detail and flexibility of hand-shape language.
Don’t lose detail; eg be able to contrast two hands that are the same except for 1 difference.
Rule/Technique: If two hands that have different form are getting assessed as having same form, the assessment is impoverished and is dropping detail/data.
All My [Y’, YI] or [Y’, Y’I] hand-shape pairs are Error? Actually [Y’I, YI] Shown?
I actually was not thrilled with lower hand showing Y’; would be nice if there is a subtle I shape that i didn’t see.
I seem to be heading away from [Y’, YI] hand-shape pair as the common Reference, to instead (looking ahead), [Y’I, YI], which expresses that:
- Metaphysically, Y (branching Possibilism) is NOT the case.
- Phenomenologically, especially in the ordinary-state, Y (branching Possibilism) IS the case.
Test Cases: Mushroom King, Psalter Viewer, {balance scale} Woman; Break Bowman; Threatening/ Relenting Swordsman (Unsheathing/ Sheathing): Quick Assessments Using New, Finger Segment Inventory-Driven Rules
Mushroom King: [IIIY’, IIIY’]
L Hand (on R): IIIY’
or, IIY’, if black line = “cut” at Index base / attachment. Time will tell.
R Hand (on L): IIIY’
Links
Canterbury folio image f145: cubensis traders, https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f145.item.zoom, https://egodeaththeory.org/2023/03/17/canterbury-f145-king-orders-shipments-of-blue-fruit-to-storage-lockboxes-with-blue-stemmed-mushroom-tree/, https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/canterbury-f145.jpg
Psalter Viewer: [Y’II, IY’I], normed: [Y’II, Y’II]
L Hand (on R): Y’II
R Hand (on L): IY’I
Links
Great Canterbury Psalter folio image f134: leg-hanging mushroom tree, https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f134.item.zoom,https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/eadwine-leg-balancing-image-2023-01-09.png
{balance scale} Woman: [IY’, YI], normed: [Y’I, YI]
Lower Hand: IY’
All 3 segments of pinkie are displayed, so, Pinkie = I
Upper Hand: YI
No black line at string, so thumb is not cut. Both segments of thumb are visible.
Links
Great Canterbury Psalter folio image f134: leg-hanging mushroom tree, https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f134.item.zoom,https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/eadwine-leg-balancing-image-2023-01-09.png
Break Bowman: [Y’I, Y’II’] or [Y’I, Y’YI’]
Lower Hand: Y’I
pinkie is I because all 3 seg visible.
Upper Hand: 1) Y’II’
or 2) Y’I or 3) Y’ Y I’
Links
Great Canterbury Psalter folio image f134: leg-hanging mushroom tree, https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f134.item.zoom,https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/eadwine-leg-balancing-image-2023-01-09.png
Threatening/ Relenting Swordsman (Unsheathing/ Sheathing): [Y’I, IIY’]
R Hand (on L): Y’I
YI order / orientation: Y’I
just’n:
- Index/Middle/Ring: Y’
They show base and mid, not tips. - Pinkie I (! big change of assessment!)
All 3 segments are visible.
FWIW, the attachment to palm is visible. - No thumb.
Therefore THIS particular hand is Y’I. If you give some OTHER different hand that does NOT show all 3 segments of a finger, but is otherwise the same as this, we should NOT say it has same YI form as THIS hand.
L Hand (on R): IIY’
Close Bowman’s R Hand: IY’I, normed: Y’II
Index: 3 seg
MIddle: 3 seg
Index & Middle are held together: I; not splayed apart Y.
Index & Middle splay apart from Ring/Pinkie.
Splaying is usually used to form an I; non-branching.
Two fingers pull threatening bowstring. That would be I. Branching is not a threat; non-branching is the threat.
Ring: 1 seg only. Y’
Pinkie: All 3 segments. I
Links
Great Canterbury Psalter folio image f134: leg-hanging mushroom tree, https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f134.item.zoom,https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/eadwine-leg-balancing-image-2023-01-09.png
Guy Above Asp-Dog: [IY, IY’], normed: [YI, Y’I]
What if you WANT to FORCE a reading of IY’ (not Y’ like my first-pass assessment) on upper hand – IS IT POSSIBLE?!
Lower Hand: IY
splayed Index I touches R arm, Y touch L arm, like von Trimberg, decoded last night, p.m. Feb. 22, 2026.
Upper Hand: IY’
A new assessment instead of simply Y’, since entire pinkie all segments are shown, including the attachment to palm.
Links
Canterbury folio image f109: lifted up in ossuary by Christ, https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10551125c/f109.item.zoom, https://egodeaththeory.org/2025/05/25/f109-great-canterbury-psalter-hellmouth-net-ossuary-cloth-looking-out-from-temple/, https://egodeaththeory.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/canterbury-f109.jpg
See Also
pending
The Egodeath theory 
