Where are you now my fingerprints?
September 25, 2018 9:54 PM Subscribe
The Surprising History (and Future) of Fingerprints "It is true that every print is unique to every finger, even for identical twins, who share the same genetic code. Fingerprints are formed by friction from touching the walls of our mother’s womb."
Previously: The Fingerprint Factory
Previously: The Fingerprint Factory
Fingerprints are formed by friction from touching the walls of our mother’s womb.
I wish the article had elaborated on this! Because it means that when artificial uteri become functional and widespread, the usefulness of fingerprints as a tool to identify people will plummet.
posted by Vesihiisi at 12:45 AM on September 26, 2018 [12 favorites]
I wish the article had elaborated on this! Because it means that when artificial uteri become functional and widespread, the usefulness of fingerprints as a tool to identify people will plummet.
posted by Vesihiisi at 12:45 AM on September 26, 2018 [12 favorites]
A lot depends on how the little creature moves around and touches things. I think genetics and chance will still make sure everyone has developed a unique set of tiny fingertips by the time the little swimmers are three inches or so long.
posted by pracowity at 12:53 AM on September 26, 2018 [3 favorites]
posted by pracowity at 12:53 AM on September 26, 2018 [3 favorites]
Fingerprints are formed by friction from touching the walls of our mother’s womb.
I wish I had a.) somehow been cognizant of this when I was a baby, and b.) able to read, so I could somehow have arranged my fingerprints to spell out "YOU'LL NEVER CATCH ME, COPPER".
posted by Mr. Bad Example at 1:44 AM on September 26, 2018 [27 favorites]
I wish I had a.) somehow been cognizant of this when I was a baby, and b.) able to read, so I could somehow have arranged my fingerprints to spell out "YOU'LL NEVER CATCH ME, COPPER".
posted by Mr. Bad Example at 1:44 AM on September 26, 2018 [27 favorites]
Fingerprints are formed by friction from touching the walls of our mother’s womb.
I didn't know this, and I'm really touched by it, for some reason. A purely genetic explanation would make me also responsible for my son's fingerprints, but the fact that they formed because he was touching the womb is just so... sweet? (I guess I'm feeling a little weepy because he's not a baby anymore and hugging him is like wrestling an octopus made out of elbows.)
posted by lollymccatburglar at 1:52 AM on September 26, 2018 [59 favorites]
I didn't know this, and I'm really touched by it, for some reason. A purely genetic explanation would make me also responsible for my son's fingerprints, but the fact that they formed because he was touching the womb is just so... sweet? (I guess I'm feeling a little weepy because he's not a baby anymore and hugging him is like wrestling an octopus made out of elbows.)
posted by lollymccatburglar at 1:52 AM on September 26, 2018 [59 favorites]
I think genetics and chance will still make sure everyone has developed a unique set of tiny fingertips by the time the little swimmers are three inches or so long.
But will they be distinguishable from an… organic grown human? Will the ID machine at the airport go BEEEP when you get into the wrong queue? Will someone hack the uterus so that it gives you koala fingerprints?
posted by Vesihiisi at 2:59 AM on September 26, 2018 [1 favorite]
But will they be distinguishable from an… organic grown human? Will the ID machine at the airport go BEEEP when you get into the wrong queue? Will someone hack the uterus so that it gives you koala fingerprints?
posted by Vesihiisi at 2:59 AM on September 26, 2018 [1 favorite]
Will someone hack the uterus so that it gives you koala fingerprints?
Is this the new Porpentine text adventure?
posted by GenjiandProust at 4:37 AM on September 26, 2018 [7 favorites]
Is this the new Porpentine text adventure?
posted by GenjiandProust at 4:37 AM on September 26, 2018 [7 favorites]
Fingerprints are formed by friction from touching the walls of our mother’s womb.
It's a sweet image, but a rather simplistic (and therefore wrong, science says you can't have nice things) way of describing the process of fingerprint ridge formation. In brief, two or three layers of skin on the fingers, toes, palms and arches are growing at different rates to each other, so you get ridges and buckles that form the basis of the later prints. Look at your hand, you can see that the texture of the prints extends all the way to your wrist, where the composition of the epidermis changes. The exact pattern is formed rather chaotically, from the fetus touching itself and the amnion and even just moving its fingers. But it will form no matter what, and I highly doubt that we could get two fingers to have the same print on the same person if we even tried.
We still don't actually have a good teleological explanation for what fingerprints are even for.
posted by Made of Star Stuff at 5:19 AM on September 26, 2018 [27 favorites]
It's a sweet image, but a rather simplistic (and therefore wrong, science says you can't have nice things) way of describing the process of fingerprint ridge formation. In brief, two or three layers of skin on the fingers, toes, palms and arches are growing at different rates to each other, so you get ridges and buckles that form the basis of the later prints. Look at your hand, you can see that the texture of the prints extends all the way to your wrist, where the composition of the epidermis changes. The exact pattern is formed rather chaotically, from the fetus touching itself and the amnion and even just moving its fingers. But it will form no matter what, and I highly doubt that we could get two fingers to have the same print on the same person if we even tried.
We still don't actually have a good teleological explanation for what fingerprints are even for.
posted by Made of Star Stuff at 5:19 AM on September 26, 2018 [27 favorites]
what fingerprints are even for
[emphasis mine]
evolution 👏 does 👏 not 👏 work 👏 that 👏 way 👏
posted by dmd at 5:40 AM on September 26, 2018 [33 favorites]
[emphasis mine]
evolution 👏 does 👏 not 👏 work 👏 that 👏 way 👏
posted by dmd at 5:40 AM on September 26, 2018 [33 favorites]
I guess I'm feeling a little weepy because he's not a baby anymore and hugging him is like wrestling an octopus made out of elbows.
No children here (no womb, either), and that little detail has made it all dusty here, too. It’s miraculous and domestic at once, and very, very sweet.
posted by notyou at 6:20 AM on September 26, 2018
No children here (no womb, either), and that little detail has made it all dusty here, too. It’s miraculous and domestic at once, and very, very sweet.
posted by notyou at 6:20 AM on September 26, 2018
Fingerprints are formed by friction from touching the walls of our mother’s womb
I wish I could go back and keep my fetal hands in tight fists the whole time, so I'd have no fingerprints.
Look at your hand, you can see that the texture of the prints extends all the way to your wrist, where the composition of the epidermis changes
My palms are very line-y (a field day for palm readers)…. maybe fetal Fig did have fists of rage the whole time! Awesome.
posted by Fig at 7:03 AM on September 26, 2018 [3 favorites]
I wish I could go back and keep my fetal hands in tight fists the whole time, so I'd have no fingerprints.
Look at your hand, you can see that the texture of the prints extends all the way to your wrist, where the composition of the epidermis changes
My palms are very line-y (a field day for palm readers)…. maybe fetal Fig did have fists of rage the whole time! Awesome.
posted by Fig at 7:03 AM on September 26, 2018 [3 favorites]
I wish I had a.) somehow been cognizant of this when I was a baby, and b.) able to read, so I could somehow have arranged my fingerprints to spell out "YOU'LL NEVER CATCH ME, COPPER".
Which ironically would have made you EXTREMELY catchable.
posted by solotoro at 7:03 AM on September 26, 2018 [11 favorites]
Which ironically would have made you EXTREMELY catchable.
posted by solotoro at 7:03 AM on September 26, 2018 [11 favorites]
All together, now:
Biometrics are usernames, not passwords!posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 7:07 AM on September 26, 2018 [8 favorites]
Which ironically would have made you EXTREMELY catchable.
Not if I used my fingers out of order! Ooh, matron.
"Sorry, chief. I thought it was the you'll-never-catch-me guy, but the crime scene prints just came back from the lab. We're looking for somebody whose prints spell 'COPPERY CULVERT CHAMELEON'."
posted by Mr. Bad Example at 7:44 AM on September 26, 2018 [14 favorites]
Not if I used my fingers out of order! Ooh, matron.
"Sorry, chief. I thought it was the you'll-never-catch-me guy, but the crime scene prints just came back from the lab. We're looking for somebody whose prints spell 'COPPERY CULVERT CHAMELEON'."
posted by Mr. Bad Example at 7:44 AM on September 26, 2018 [14 favorites]
The Chinese had realized that before anyone: a Qin dynasty document from the third-century B.C.E, titled “The Volume of Crime Scene Investigation—Burglary,” pointed up fingerprints as a means of evincing whodunnit.
Emphasis mine. Also, the title of the document! I would love to see that source. I'm fascinated.
posted by twilightlost at 7:58 AM on September 26, 2018 [3 favorites]
Emphasis mine. Also, the title of the document! I would love to see that source. I'm fascinated.
posted by twilightlost at 7:58 AM on September 26, 2018 [3 favorites]
" Fingerprints are formed by friction from touching the walls of our mother’s womb"
I don't buy this. My aunt told me that babies punch, knee and elbow in the womb too and yet prints only happen to develop in the hands. Hence, I am positive that my children's prints will be just as much a result of my contribution as my wife's and the article is a big lying liar.
*shuts door to office and buries self in today's paper
posted by fantasticness at 8:37 AM on September 26, 2018
I don't buy this. My aunt told me that babies punch, knee and elbow in the womb too and yet prints only happen to develop in the hands. Hence, I am positive that my children's prints will be just as much a result of my contribution as my wife's and the article is a big lying liar.
*shuts door to office and buries self in today's paper
posted by fantasticness at 8:37 AM on September 26, 2018
It does seem pretty questionable. Googling found me a few articles from legitimate sources that mention the fact, but none explain it. It just seems too precious, especially considering the fact that all sorts of other fetus parts touch the womb.
posted by jonathanhughes at 10:07 AM on September 26, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by jonathanhughes at 10:07 AM on September 26, 2018 [1 favorite]
I don't think it's implying that touching the womb causes a part of the body to wrinkle or whorl. But rather, fingers (and toes, I guess!) are already inclined to have such a pattern, but what, when, and how they touch things in that stage of development affects what the pattern looks like.
Which, uh, still sounds too precious. How in the world would we test this to prove or disprove it?
posted by explosion at 10:49 AM on September 26, 2018 [2 favorites]
Which, uh, still sounds too precious. How in the world would we test this to prove or disprove it?
posted by explosion at 10:49 AM on September 26, 2018 [2 favorites]
It's possible that as a new mom, I was overly charmed by the in the womb description! At least the writer fact checked the koala claim, which I also really enjoyed.
Gorillas, chimpanzees, and koalas also possess exclusive prints. Those of koalas have been reported as indistinguishable from those of humans—with some outlets claiming that the similarity has tripped up Australian crime scene investigators. I wondered about this.
posted by carolr at 11:57 AM on September 26, 2018 [4 favorites]
Gorillas, chimpanzees, and koalas also possess exclusive prints. Those of koalas have been reported as indistinguishable from those of humans—with some outlets claiming that the similarity has tripped up Australian crime scene investigators. I wondered about this.
posted by carolr at 11:57 AM on September 26, 2018 [4 favorites]
in case you were wondering like I was, this page explains what dots, lakes, bifurcations, etc, looks like on your fingers
* goes back to staring at fingers *
posted by numaner at 12:09 PM on September 26, 2018 [1 favorite]
* goes back to staring at fingers *
posted by numaner at 12:09 PM on September 26, 2018 [1 favorite]
Bullshit.
Ever hear of the placenta? Fetuses are enclosed in a bag of fluid inside the womb. Whatever else may be true in this piece, it is not true that unborn babies touch the inside of their mother's wombs. The placenta is basically an eggshell made of membrane, except that it is also attached to the inside of the womb and the umbilical cord carries nutrition from the mother and transfers biomatter from the child.
Fig, the only things your hands touched were the amniotic fluid and your own placenta; that placenta was genetically part of you, not your mother.
It's a nice poetic idea, of course.
I begin to see how all this anti-abortion stuff is wrecking our education. Knowing that human fetuses are enclosed in placentas and that they are not fully formed teeny microscopic people at conception is such a basic bit of biology that is junior high school level information. I thought that that adults I met who believed that a six-week old fetus is identical to a forty-week were an anomaly. Turns out that a lot of people still are teaching medieval mythology.
posted by Jane the Brown at 12:12 PM on September 26, 2018 [11 favorites]
Ever hear of the placenta? Fetuses are enclosed in a bag of fluid inside the womb. Whatever else may be true in this piece, it is not true that unborn babies touch the inside of their mother's wombs. The placenta is basically an eggshell made of membrane, except that it is also attached to the inside of the womb and the umbilical cord carries nutrition from the mother and transfers biomatter from the child.
Fig, the only things your hands touched were the amniotic fluid and your own placenta; that placenta was genetically part of you, not your mother.
It's a nice poetic idea, of course.
I begin to see how all this anti-abortion stuff is wrecking our education. Knowing that human fetuses are enclosed in placentas and that they are not fully formed teeny microscopic people at conception is such a basic bit of biology that is junior high school level information. I thought that that adults I met who believed that a six-week old fetus is identical to a forty-week were an anomaly. Turns out that a lot of people still are teaching medieval mythology.
posted by Jane the Brown at 12:12 PM on September 26, 2018 [11 favorites]
Jane, the bag that surrounds the fetus is the amniotic sac. The placenta is on one side of that, interfacing with the uterine wall. I'm not sure if placenta technically extends inside the amnion so that the fetus could touch it or not, but it certainly doesn't enclose the fetus.
Otherwise you make a good point with your comment.
posted by recursion at 1:54 PM on September 26, 2018 [6 favorites]
Otherwise you make a good point with your comment.
posted by recursion at 1:54 PM on September 26, 2018 [6 favorites]
MetaFilter: like wrestling an octopus made out of elbows
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 9:16 PM on September 26, 2018 [4 favorites]
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 9:16 PM on September 26, 2018 [4 favorites]
dmd: Evolution does not work that way
Excuse my naked appeal to authority, but I am an evolutionary biologist. Evolution doesn't see a problem and think of a way to fix it, no. In that sense, it's wrong to say that something has a teleological explanation, a purpose. However, we can still trace causes of evolution, both internal and external. External causes are the forces of evolution, specific circumstances that create selection pressures, or allow neutral drift to push a population's phenotypes across the fitness landscape.
When there's a case of convergence across drastic evolutionary distance--pitcher plants evolving on two different continents from different kinds of plants, koalas and primates both evolving fingerprints--it's perfectly reasonable to hypothesize that these convergent morphologies are both evolutionary "answers" to the same "problem."
Functional morphology is the study of what body parts are good for. Your mouth is good for eating, and you have the kind of teeth you do because of the particular kind of food our ancestors ate (a whole lot more tough vegetable matter that would have necessitated growing another four molars later in life). Eyes are good for perceiving light, and there are many different kinds of eyes (and cephalopod eyes are objectively better than human ones because they don't have a blind spot, (get it, objectively)).
There's (at least) two different kinds of fingerprints, primate and koala, but what are they even FOR? What do they help with? What problem do they solve? Yes, I grant you, they could be "spandrels", but even then, they have to be the result of some structural, morphological convergence causing koalas and humans to have ventral autopod (palms, soles) skin development that results in fingerprints. ... Why? What do we do the same? Climbing trees is the obvious first hypothesis, but functional studies indicate that fingerprints shouldn't help with that. Like seriously what is even the whole deal with fingerprints?
So that's what I meant by we don't even know what they're for.
posted by Made of Star Stuff at 3:54 AM on September 27, 2018 [5 favorites]
Excuse my naked appeal to authority, but I am an evolutionary biologist. Evolution doesn't see a problem and think of a way to fix it, no. In that sense, it's wrong to say that something has a teleological explanation, a purpose. However, we can still trace causes of evolution, both internal and external. External causes are the forces of evolution, specific circumstances that create selection pressures, or allow neutral drift to push a population's phenotypes across the fitness landscape.
When there's a case of convergence across drastic evolutionary distance--pitcher plants evolving on two different continents from different kinds of plants, koalas and primates both evolving fingerprints--it's perfectly reasonable to hypothesize that these convergent morphologies are both evolutionary "answers" to the same "problem."
Functional morphology is the study of what body parts are good for. Your mouth is good for eating, and you have the kind of teeth you do because of the particular kind of food our ancestors ate (a whole lot more tough vegetable matter that would have necessitated growing another four molars later in life). Eyes are good for perceiving light, and there are many different kinds of eyes (and cephalopod eyes are objectively better than human ones because they don't have a blind spot, (get it, objectively)).
There's (at least) two different kinds of fingerprints, primate and koala, but what are they even FOR? What do they help with? What problem do they solve? Yes, I grant you, they could be "spandrels", but even then, they have to be the result of some structural, morphological convergence causing koalas and humans to have ventral autopod (palms, soles) skin development that results in fingerprints. ... Why? What do we do the same? Climbing trees is the obvious first hypothesis, but functional studies indicate that fingerprints shouldn't help with that. Like seriously what is even the whole deal with fingerprints?
So that's what I meant by we don't even know what they're for.
posted by Made of Star Stuff at 3:54 AM on September 27, 2018 [5 favorites]
« Older The 13th month would be named Sol—every month... | The Cost Of All That Magic Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by misteraitch at 12:43 AM on September 26, 2018 [1 favorite]