**Correction**: A-T & C-G, not ~~A-C & G-T~~
The question arose from [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/comments/k3b4ba/just_like_computers_speak_in_binary_1s_and_0s_the/ge2jzil?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3), where I compared binary code to human DNA’s ACGT, then someone who knows more about IT than me made a good question.
If it’s not clear what I’m asking yet:
in binary you can have a lot of variation with the values 1 and 0
in human DNA (if we ignore RNA and (U)racil for now) there are four values, A, C, G, T. But since they bind strictly A-C & G-T doesn’t that technically leave DNA with only two factors to variate with?
Like: ~~A-C, A-C, G-T, A-C~~ A-T, A-T, C-G, A-T
Instead of: AGTATAC
In: Biology
When replication happens, only one side of the helix gets copied.
The two ends of the helix are unique from one another, the body can tell them apart, and has a preferred direction that it will follow.
Because of this, even though they always come in pairs, swapping a pair would change the message being copied, because of this preferred direction.
Latest Answers