Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!brl-adm!seismo!nbires!isis!udenva!agranok From: agranok@udenva.UUCP Newsgroups: sci.bio Subject: Re: question Message-ID: <3310@udenva.UUCP> Date: Sun, 29-Mar-87 15:12:11 EST Article-I.D.: udenva.3310 Posted: Sun Mar 29 15:12:11 1987 Date-Received: Tue, 31-Mar-87 01:47:26 EST References: <11189@teknowledge-vaxc.ARPA> <978@aecom.UUCP> Reply-To: agranok@udenva.UUCP (Alexander Granok) Organization: U of Denver Lines: 28 Summary: Definition of a Human "Byte" In article <978@aecom.UUCP> werner@aecom.UUCP (Craig Werner) writes: >In article <11189@teknowledge-vaxc.ARPA>, rburns@teknowledge-vaxc.ARPA (Randy Burns) writes: >> I was wondering roughly how many 'bytes' of information are contained >> within human chromosomes? > > Hence, if a byte is a base pair, that's your answer, although >only two bits are required to specify a base, ergo a 'byte' could >actually be a tetranucleotide, but most sequences are stored as >letters (ATCG). The whole arguement gets caught up in definitions, here. I would consider a bit to be a base pair, and a byte to be the set of three that encodes for one amino acid. Instead of eight bits to a byte, there are three. After all, one base pair by itself doesn't do much good. But, if a base pair is a bit, then what is a nucleotide? I guess it all depends on what you mean by "informa- tion." That's the problem with trying to put restrictions from one system onto another. I think a better question might be something like: "How many amino acids (words in the language of proteins) are encoded for on the human chromosomes?" or "How many books could these words fill?" I seem to remember Sagan doing something like this on Cosmos. Anyway, I think that would give a much more easily palpable idea for the enormity of information involved. -- Alex Granok hao!udenva!agranok "Wait a minute. Strike that. Reverse it."