• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Why does 37 occur so often in our DNA?

Asbo Zaprudder

Asbo Zaprudder

Admiral
Admiral
Interesting article about the prime number 37 occurring many time in analysis of our DNA and amino acids that it encodes.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/781150/Aliens-created-genetic-code-life-dna

There is a better writeup in New Scientist but it's behind a paywall:
https://www.newscientist.com/articl...nswer-to-life-the-universe-and-everything-37/

Especially interesting to me is the very statistically extremely unlikely pairing of whole and split codon groups according to Rumer's transposition of their first two letters. I suspect there must be a deeper evolutionary reason to do with stabilising DNA against too many potentially harmful random mutations by introducing error correction and coding redundancy.

The original paper, which posits that the evidence suggests DNA was artificially engineered and used to seed life on Earth is here (again behind a paywall):
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0019103513000791?via=ihub

That the prime number 37 seems to occur so many times is very strange but is it just the human disposition to seek patterns and meaning that's going on here? I suspect that explanation to be the case. Like a conspiracy theory, a form of confirmation bias if not selection bias is probably at play but, dab nagit, it is an intriguing observation.
 
Last edited:
...or aliens who terraform over very long time scales...

Let's hope they hadn't just forgotten they left Earth baking and are pissed to find us having evolved. Time to scrape off the burnt bits, throw us in the bin, or welcome their mistake like a child product of an almost forgotten one-night stand?

Here's daddy!
 
Maurice said:
I would not trust the "science" reporting of either of those websites. Pfffft.
Click to expand...
To which two of the three sites are you referring? Some justification for your mistrust would be helpful.

I suspect a combination of confirmation bias and wishful thinking is responsible, much like the Epsilon Boötis alien probe claim of Duncan Lunan perhaps, which has never been disproved although Lunan disowned it for a while.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epsilon_Boötis

http://www.simons-karrer.com/spaceprobe.html

http://locklip.com/the-myth-and-truth-about-the-13000-year-old-alien-satellite/
 
Last edited:
New Scientist and Science Direct are both good sites to read up on science.

"The Express" is just a newspaper/rag so...
 
StarCruiser said:
New Scientist and Science Direct are both good sites to read up on science.

"The Express" is just a newspaper/rag so...
Click to expand...
New Scientist does come in for a far bit of criticism for the variable quality of some of its articles. However, it does pick up on a lot of stuff that would be ignored in other popular science magazine. You just have to be prepared not to accept that what is reported is necessarily valid. It's not a peer-reviewed science journal.

The Daily Express is a right-wing newspaper and its science reporting is no better than many other UK newspapers. Like NS, the quality does vary according to the writer and editorial control. Better to go seek other, more primary sources if an article interests you.

As for Science Direct, I have little experience of reading articles via that site. It's basically a search engine for numerous engineering, mefical and scientific journals.
 
Last edited:
StarCruiser said:
Either we have the wrong "ultimate answer to the ultimate question" or it's PROOF OF GOD!!!
Click to expand...

That would be 42.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

:D
 
Asbo Zaprudder said:
New Scientist does come in for a far bit of criticism for the variable quality of some of its articles. However, it does pick up on a lot of stuff that would be ignored in other popular science magazine. You just have to be prepared not to accept that what is reported is necessarily valid. It's not a peer-reviewed science journal.

The Daily Express is a right-wing newspaper and its science reporting is no better than many other UK newspapers. Like NS, the quality does vary according to the writer and editorial control. Better to go seek other, more primary sources if an article interests you.

As for Science Direct, I have little experience of reading articles via that site. It's basically a search engine for numerous engineering, mefical and scientific journals.
Click to expand...

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/sciencedirect/
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-express/

:D
 
Cutie McWhiskers said:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/sciencedirect/
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-express/
:D
Click to expand...
Pretty much confirms my opinion about those two outlets then. However, it reveals nothing about the truth of whether 37 is hard coded into the RNA and DNA of life on Earth.

New Scientist comes out as relatively unbiased, which confirms my previously unstated opinion that its editorial policies have improved over the past few years.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/?s=New+Scientist
 
Last edited:
I was kinda hoping/expecting it(37) to be a fibonacci number as they are everywhere in nature, but its not.
Anyway i cant seem to find anything really that suggest that 37 are THAT often in DNA?
Some numbers, if you divide them, you get 37 and others are a multiples of the number but the number 37 itself dont seem to pop up extraordinary often?
 
pl1ngpl0ng said:
I was kinda hoping/expecting it(37) to be a fibonacci number as they are everywhere in nature, but its not.
Anyway i cant seem to find anything really that suggest that 37 are THAT often in DNA?
Some numbers, if you divide them, you get 37 and others are a multiples of the number but the number 37 itself dont seem to pop up extraordinary often?
Click to expand...
37 is a prime number. If you multiply 37 by multiples of 3, you get 111, 222, 333, 444, 555, 666, ...

37 is also a hexagonal number: 37 = 1 + 6 + 12 + 18.

https://mrob.com/pub/math/numbers-6.html

If you play around with numbers enough, you probably start to see patterns everywhere and are tempted to ascribe deeper meaning to them - hence numerology.

ETA: Seven things that people have ascribed to aliens.
https://www.newscientist.com/articl...ught-were-made-by-aliens-but-werent-probably/
 
Last edited:
I guess it's our curse to see patterns and correlations where none actually exist - sometimes they are valid and we make useful deductions. Often we assign too much validity to random coincidences in the search for a "meaning".
 
Asbo Zaprudder said:
I guess it's our curse to see patterns and correlations where none actually exist - sometimes they are valid and we make useful deductions. Often we assign too much validity to random coincidences in the search for a "meaning".
Click to expand...
Literary criticism would be dead without it. So far as science is concerned, I would think your first thought that folks are seeing meaning in the happenstance of the number where no deeper meaning really exists. I instinctively loath aliens did it since that answer is just turtles supporting the Earth.
 
Gov Kodos said:
Literary criticism would be dead without it. So far as science is concerned, I would think your first thought that folks are seeing meaning in the happenstance of the number where no deeper meaning really exists. I instinctively loath aliens did it since that answer is just turtles supporting the Earth.
Click to expand...
It seems to me that literary (or other) criticism often reveals more about the critic than the work being criticised.
 
Asbo Zaprudder said:
Interesting article about the prime number 37 occurring many time in analysis of our DNA and amino acids that it encodes.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/781150/Aliens-created-genetic-code-life-dna
Click to expand...
Article headline
"Aliens created our genetic code and signed it with the number 37, scientists say"
And an article that goes on to describe a pair of scientists from... wait for it... Khazakstan

Sounds legit.

That the prime number 37 seems to occur so many times is very strange
Click to expand...
That researchers from third world countries whose academic institutions are better known for their quackery than for legitimate research contributions to the western world manage to cherry pick data to amplify an unusual numerical coincidence and then leap to an altogether spurious conclusion, is not.
 
Crazy Eddie said:
Article headline
"Aliens created our genetic code and signed it with the number 37, scientists say"
And an article that goes on to describe a pair of scientists from... wait for it... Khazakstan

Sounds legit.


That researchers from third world countries whose academic institutions are better known for their quackery than for legitimate research contributions to the western world manage to cherry pick data to amplify an unusual numerical coincidence and then leap to an altogether spurious conclusion, is not.
Click to expand...
I agree with your conclusion but not with the casual racism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top