posted on Oct, 8 2007 @ 01:58 AM
There are biophysical and evolutionary problems associated with DNA with a triple helix structure.
Calling on a well-accepted biophysical explanation for its impracticality, Linus Pauling's proposed structure placed the phophate backbone of DNA in
the very center of this helix. At cellular pH, these phosphates would bear a negative charge. This many negative charges in such proximity would
contain so much energy that it would literally blow the molecule apart. We don't know of any other proposed triple helix molecule of inheritance.
Moreover, DNA is the molecule of inheritance. In DNA replication, the two strands of the helices are unwound, duplicated, then distributed to the
daughter cells in either a mitotic or meiotic fashion. Read about mitosis and meiosis on wikipedia if you're unfamiliar. The daughter cells
ultimately receive the same double helices of DNA. A child is born when an egg cell (bearing double helical DNA) combines with a sperm cell (also
containing double helical DNA). For a child to be born with a triple helix of DNA would mean that in some radically short period of time, the very
foundations of how life is perpetuated through generations, a fact which is a culmination of billions of years of events, would change drastically.
It's as unlikely as you sprouting a functional anus in your forehead as you sleep tonight.
There could be other models of a triple helix, but any such structure does not exist in the scientific conscious, so the only triple helix that anyone
could probably be referring to is Linus Pauling's, and his was declared inviable in 1953 when Watson, Crick, and Franklin revealed the double
Finally, anticipating the emergence of "indigo children" is extremely wishful. It isn't impossible, but it's still so unlikely that your hopes
and dreams might better be spent studying and thinking about those things in life which are happening, and which are real. Science has taught us that
this universe is filled with such fantastic stories if we are only willing to probe into them in a testable fashion, so that we know what we are
thinking is true. As I said, indigo children may appear someday, but we have no way of testing this prediction scientifically. All we have are
anecdotes and folk tales. As an entertainment, it's okay, but as a serious intellectual pursuit and investment of time, it's not so okay. Imagine
living a life built around fairy tales, and dying having never actually touched upon reality. You might instead think about the idea that, as far as
we can tell, our brains are the root of everything that has been described up to this point in time as Mind and Spirit. Suspend any disbelief and
entertain the ramifications of that idea. Then try studying how it manages to do this. Then try imagining that there are other beings thinking the
same thing somewhere infinitely far away. That's pretty cool.