A study by biomechanicist (apparently, there's such a thing) Roland Ennos and Peter Warman of the University of Manchester, UK, has just blown away decades of conventional knowledge: fingerprints do not increase our grip - instead, it reduces it!
Rather than singe the prints off an unlucky student to compare hands with and without prints, Ennos rigged Warman's fingers to a special device that slides a weighted sheet of Perspex across a finger and measures the resulting frictional force.
Ennos and Warman determined that the amount of friction generated went up as more of the fingerprint was touching the sheet, but not by as much as expected. This indicated that the skin was behaving like rubber, where friction is proportional to the contact area between the two surfaces.
So, if not for increasing grip, then why do we have fingerprints? Scientists think that fingerprints may improve tactile sensitivity, help water wick off fingers, and reduce shear stress.
Ultimately, the answer is, "Because it was God's will for mankind." He knew that it would be better for us to have them than not to have them. He knew about identification by fingerprint before He created the first man and woman.
You know... to aid us in identification purposes?
And for our US friends read "eraser" in place of "rubber"
(Although the use of the word rubber does make the article more entertaining...)
I wonder how fingerprints perform on materials like wood or tree branches. I'm pretty sure our ancestors would not have encountered a material like a laboratory friction test plate in nature.
In other words, fingerprints could be a useless bi-product.
Also I must admit I may be too hungover to know what I'm talking about =c)
Am I dumb or are the scientists dumb?
this is analogous to slicks and wets in racing
Pointless.
I might suggest that smooth surfaces are very rare in the natural world, and that fingerprints do help us grip rough objects, made of wood or stone.
But perhaps this pointless controversy will allow the researchers to grip some more funding.
Since we did not evolve with Perspex, then it is doubtful that a surface like that has anything to do with fingerprints. I read another case (can't remember the researchers of course) and they found that slightly sweaty bare hands and feet produced a superior grip when climbing trees.
I love Neatorama, and know it is mostly about entertainment, but please don't act like the "real" media and report on any study that is published. The national news does this constantly. Anybody can set up a study to produce skewed results, that's why science relies on repetition of studies to compare results.
I can assure you, fingerprints were indeed useful for that. I did the same tasks with and without fingerprints, and I noticed a difference.
Bad science articles make Brammi angry!
BRAMMI SMASH!!!
Frictional behavior in rubber is known to be highly dependent on wetness and macroscopic roughness, especially in dynamic loading (sounds dirty). The study does not encompass any of these variables.