What determines nose structure?

P

pluto2

Banned
Banned
What determines nose structure? Why do people have different noses? Is it the nasal bone?
 
Last edited:
pluto2 said:
Is it more bone structure or is it more genetic?
Click to expand...

Spider has already answered this.
Although, I wonder how much effect nutrition has on ones nose-shape. I don't think it has all that much effect, if any.
The biggest difference are because of ethnicity and the varieties within. And those are purely genetic.
I'm assuming you don't want to include injuries to the face and bone deforming diseases..
 
Last edited:
pluto2 said:
What determines nose structure? Why do people have different noses? Is it the nasal bone?
Click to expand...


Excellent thread. I ask, why do I look like my Mother while my sister takes after dear old Dad?
If we dissect the nose we find all the protein, chemical densities, chemical concentrations, and you name it? But, I think your question can be rephrased, to, ‘where is the blueprint for any one particular nose’? My nose looks like mom’s, but the noses are different and hence, different blueprints form each nose. Similar, but different.
Some will [and have] mention “genetics” and “DNA”- OK in what part of genetics do they store the blueprints? Is it a central cache? Individual caches? Would cache locations be partly shared by similar or identical characteristics for certain parts of two organic bodies? In other words, do I and mom share blueprints -- partially? If so, where is it, the blueprint used for constructing mom’s nose and later used partially by me to construct my nose, while maintaining similar physical characteristics of mom’s nose, yet ultimately unique to me, nose?

DNA, did someone say? Where is the blueprint in the DNA system that my system refers to in determining the type of protein, where the protein is to be shipped and in what quantities, such that when assembled the blueprint can be said to have been satisfied. How does the protein navigate through all the myriad of veins and capillaries and get to the right spot and probably at the right time. By this I mean, as the protein arrives it is immediately set in place, without the need for storage or warehousing. And who is keeping the books regarding sub-system completions, on total system completions and in what way is the information transmitted to the appropriate concerned manufacturing system.

The gene saga with the fairy tale DNA/RNA postulates and dogmatic never to vary characteristics – such as DNA can be changed only by external forces, by radiation and random activity are items familiar to my reading, but I still do not see the blueprint, wouldn’t know how to access a particular blue print from an enormous collection of blue prints if I did see the blue print– something must have some “current state” sensing potential, such as ‘knowing’ that certain proteins are needed assembled in order to form my nose, like mom’s.

One is tempted to say, “Aha, God must be doing it.”, but if you were God would you design a system that required a huge amount of your attention for the rather rote job of forming individual noses, where modern day assembly line techniques simply wont work, meaning there ain’t a Platonic Form for noses that is standardized and used throughout nose construction. The individual physical characteristics of humanity demand a preexisting functional system that guarantees the more or less consistent result of birth and growing i.e. aging. To Say its all stored in the chemicals, in the observed chemicals, that is, in the DNA and even if you, I say rhetorically, admit ignorance to the location or even some clue to how physical makeup is mechanically achieved per spec, for ALL scientific intents and purposes, the undiscovered latency in the observable world, must still be considered as “nonlocal”, and until discovered otherwise. This nonlocality does not conduct itself rationally, meaning we can’t see the blue print or the road maps re the proper nose sites.
We do have a clue however, that this nonlocal system, has statistical functions inherent in the mechanism
Let me turn you all on to Dr. Rupert Sheldrake, bio-scientist who has dealt with this subject in excruciating depth and detail, and he comes highly recommended by the scientific community – at least half that are familiar with Sheldrake’s works have him permanently type cast as hysterically as a heretic – is this not a recommendation? -- the other half respects his daring do in his painting outside the numbered constrictions. His best book, which is thoroughly documented, Sheldrake is as far at sea as anyone, yet his theses has a quieting sound to it.
If you were one of millions of 6 centimeter fishes swimming in a mass bulk that extends say to 50 feet spherical diameter. A hungry shark looking for lunch spots your school of fish, he turns opens his mouth and aims for the center of the school. What do the little fishes do? Do they burst into a screaming terrorized mob seeing the shark approaching? No. What they do is reform the sphere into a doughnut and the shark swims through the hole, sans lunch- the shark probably won’t even try to reverse direction and chase down an intact volume of fishes.
How do all the little fishes know where to swim, where the dividing line is, one swim left, and the other turns right?

I saw some birds land in a river bed near my home. A couple thousand were walking around on ground what had the day before been under water. Almost in perfect coordination, the birds flew off in a calculated direction. The flock was undulating like a rug moves in a wave when being shook free of dust. No birds collided with any neighbors. The flock stayed together as a recognizable unit but absent were any human characteristics as perfect positions of flying aircraft in formation – the birds weren’t so concerned in maintaining straight lines of birds, or ordered columns, but they were as a unit, thousands of birds, all coordinated.

Sheldrake’s book, “The Presence of the Past, The Habits of Nature, Morphic Resonance” ($20) – an absolute must for anyone considering themselves scientists.



Darwin almost referred to his work as, “The habits of nature.” If mom can substitute as a model for me and her mom for her and so on, then I must be able to relax in the presence of nature’s habitual activity. Unfortunately, original causes are not clearly understood, but this logical and rational transcendental point is merely, partially at least, a human sensed confusion and needing an observed explanation, more than, “its all in the DNA”. Most scientists who reject, or simply don’t investigate, nonlocality, do so out of a dread of pre -17th century religiosity is mixed with science – well this is an opinion at least.
Here is a scary story that most scientists abhor, or claim to know nothing about. If two light particles with a total angular momentum equal to zero suddenly begin moving in opposite directions. After a couple of hours the angular momentum of one of the light particles is measured, say at +1. Now we know from conservation considerations that the other unmeasured light particle must be in a state of -1. Even if the momenta were wildly gyrating, measuring one angular momentum, stabilizes the other to a ‘constant’ and contrary to QM Law, the other state is predicted.
Assume the angular momentum vectors are represented by a schoolyard teeter totter. One up, the other down in perfect harmony. Now, grab one end and stop it. The other is immediately stopped also; however, the particles may be separated by two light hours of flight time. In other words, the measured angular momentum is sensed nonlocally such that the two particles’ angular momentum has no local analogue regarding spatial constrictions.
This isn’t spooky or even objectionable, to hard core determinists it’s another dimension, if you will, and dimensions mathematicians play with all day long.
Too long a post, o shat, non will read.:shrug:​
 
I couldn't quickly find any online reference, but I know from observation and highschool textbooks that with age, especially in old people (more than about 60 years old), the nose becomes bigger.
 
geistkiesel said:



Excellent thread. I ask, why do I look like my Mother while my sister takes after dear old Dad?
If we dissect the nose we find all the protein, chemical densities, chemical concentrations, and you name it? But, I think your question can be rephrased, to, ‘where is the blueprint for any one particular nose’? My nose looks like mom’s, but the noses are different and hence, different blueprints form each nose. Similar, but different.
Some will [and have] mention “genetics” and “DNA”- OK in what part of genetics do they store the blueprints? Is it a central cache? Individual caches? Would cache locations be partly shared by similar or identical characteristics for certain parts of two organic bodies? In other words, do I and mom share blueprints -- partially? If so, where is it, the blueprint used for constructing mom’s nose and later used partially by me to construct my nose, while maintaining similar physical characteristics of mom’s nose, yet ultimately unique to me, nose?​
Click to expand...

Where in the DNA is the blueprint ? The DNA IS the blueprint.

geistkiesel said:
DNA, did someone say? Where is the blueprint in the DNA system that my system refers to in determining the type of protein, where the protein is to be shipped and in what quantities, such that when assembled the blueprint can be said to have been satisfied. How does the protein navigate through all the myriad of veins and capillaries and get to the right spot and probably at the right time. By this I mean, as the protein arrives it is immediately set in place, without the need for storage or warehousing. And who is keeping the books regarding sub-system completions, on total system completions and in what way is the information transmitted to the appropriate concerned manufacturing system.
Click to expand...
Uh.. see above ?
The proteins aren't shipped as you mention, they are made on the spot.

geistkiesel said:
The gene saga with the fairy tale DNA/RNA postulates and dogmatic never to vary characteristics – such as DNA can be changed only by external forces, by radiation and random activity are items familiar to my reading, but I still do not see the blueprint, wouldn’t know how to access a particular blue print from an enormous collection of blue prints if I did see the blue print– something must have some “current state” sensing potential, such as ‘knowing’ that certain proteins are needed assembled in order to form my nose, like mom’s.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you're on about.. and I'm not sure you do yourself. Are you at least a little bit familiar with how genetics works ?

geistkiesel said:
One is tempted to say, “Aha, God must be doing it.”, but if you were God would you design a system that required a huge amount of your attention for the rather rote job of forming individual noses, where modern day assembly line techniques simply wont work, meaning there ain’t a Platonic Form for noses that is standardized and used throughout nose construction. The individual physical characteristics of humanity demand a preexisting functional system that guarantees the more or less consistent result of birth and growing i.e. aging. To Say its all stored in the chemicals, in the observed chemicals, that is, in the DNA and even if you, I say rhetorically, admit ignorance to the location or even some clue to how physical makeup is mechanically achieved per spec, for ALL scientific intents and purposes, the undiscovered latency in the observable world, must still be considered as “nonlocal”, and until discovered otherwise. This nonlocality does not conduct itself rationally, meaning we can’t see the blue print or the road maps re the proper nose sites.
We do have a clue however, that this nonlocal system, has statistical functions inherent in the mechanism
Let me turn you all on to Dr. Rupert Sheldrake, bio-scientist who has dealt with this subject in excruciating depth and detail, and he comes highly recommended by the scientific community – at least half that are familiar with Sheldrake’s works have him permanently type cast as hysterically as a heretic – is this not a recommendation? -- the other half respects his daring do in his painting outside the numbered constrictions. His best book, which is thoroughly documented, Sheldrake is as far at sea as anyone, yet his theses has a quieting sound to it.
If you were one of millions of 6 centimeter fishes swimming in a mass bulk that extends say to 50 feet spherical diameter. A hungry shark looking for lunch spots your school of fish, he turns opens his mouth and aims for the center of the school. What do the little fishes do? Do they burst into a screaming terrorized mob seeing the shark approaching? No. What they do is reform the sphere into a doughnut and the shark swims through the hole, sans lunch- the shark probably won’t even try to reverse direction and chase down an intact volume of fishes.
How do all the little fishes know where to swim, where the dividing line is, one swim left, and the other turns right?
Click to expand...
Perhaps you are referring to migratory cells that exist in the embryonic stage ?

geistkiesel said:
I saw some birds land in a river bed near my home. A couple thousand were walking around on ground what had the day before been under water. Almost in perfect coordination, the birds flew off in a calculated direction. The flock was undulating like a rug moves in a wave when being shook free of dust. No birds collided with any neighbors. The flock stayed together as a recognizable unit but absent were any human characteristics as perfect positions of flying aircraft in formation – the birds weren’t so concerned in maintaining straight lines of birds, or ordered columns, but they were as a unit, thousands of birds, all coordinated.

Sheldrake’s book, “The Presence of the Past, The Habits of Nature, Morphic Resonance” ($20) – an absolute must for anyone considering themselves scientists.
Click to expand...
And your point is ?

geistkiesel said:
Darwin almost referred to his work as, “The habits of nature.” If mom can substitute as a model for me and her mom for her and so on, then I must be able to relax in the presence of nature’s habitual activity. Unfortunately, original causes are not clearly understood, but this logical and rational transcendental point is merely, partially at least, a human sensed confusion and needing an observed explanation, more than, “its all in the DNA”. Most scientists who reject, or simply don’t investigate, nonlocality, do so out of a dread of pre -17th century religiosity is mixed with science – well this is an opinion at least.
Here is a scary story that most scientists abhor, or claim to know nothing about. If two light particles with a total angular momentum equal to zero suddenly begin moving in opposite directions. After a couple of hours the angular momentum of one of the light particles is measured, say at +1. Now we know from conservation considerations that the other unmeasured light particle must be in a state of -1. Even if the momenta were wildly gyrating, measuring one angular momentum, stabilizes the other to a ‘constant’ and contrary to QM Law, the other state is predicted.
Assume the angular momentum vectors are represented by a schoolyard teeter totter. One up, the other down in perfect harmony. Now, grab one end and stop it. The other is immediately stopped also; however, the particles may be separated by two light hours of flight time. In other words, the measured angular momentum is sensed nonlocally such that the two particles’ angular momentum has no local analogue regarding spatial constrictions.
This isn’t spooky or even objectionable, to hard core determinists it’s another dimension, if you will, and dimensions mathematicians play with all day long.
Too long a post, o shat, non will read.:shrug:
Click to expand...
Why are you talking about QM ?
And could you perhaps, if you choose to respond, write stuff down in a bit more readable manner ?
 
greenberg said:
I couldn't quickly find any online reference, but I know from observation and highschool textbooks that with age, especially in old people (more than about 60 years old), the nose becomes bigger.
Click to expand...

What does this have to do with anything ?
 
It would be interesting to examine why the different ethnicities have the noses they do, what environmental and/or cultural elements have had what influences on the shaping of them. It seems this is a touchy subject though, and so it is neglected by the scientific community. A great shame IMO. I'm interested in the different dog breeds and why they differ in the ways they do, I'd love to analyse homo sapiens in a similar manner.
 
Dr Lou Natic said:
It would be interesting to examine why the different ethnicities have the noses they do, what environmental and/or cultural elements have had what influences on the shaping of them. It seems this is a touchy subject though, and so it is neglected by the scientific community. A great shame IMO. I'm interested in the different dog breeds and why they differ in the ways they do, I'd love to analyse homo sapiens in a similar manner.
Click to expand...

I believe that research has already been done though.
 
In the 19th century perhaps, but it's largely forgotten and shunned from discussion these days.
 
Dr Lou Natic said:
In the 19th century perhaps, but it's largely forgotten and shunned from discussion these days.
Click to expand...

Perhaps.. I just know I once heard or read something about it.
I looked around but I can't seem to find any this quick.
Most of the differences are, however, caused by sexual selection.
Also, people in the colder areas of the world developed larger noses so as to warm the incoming air more efficiently.
 
The same could, logically, go for people in dry areas. They might have developed larger noses to make the air moist more efficiently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top