This is a typical formula of Numerology: A = 1, B = 2, C = 3... G = 7... T = 20, U = 21, etc...

If we numerologically transform the 1st letters of DNA: (Adenine- Cytosine, Guanine/ Thymine) into numbers, we get: {1, 3, 7} and 20.

If we do the same for RNA (Adenine- Cytosine, Guanine/ Uracil) we get: {1, 3, 7} and 21.

If we add the first three numbers (1 + 3 + 7) we get 11. By adding both elevens: (11 + 11) we get 22. In such an exercise we are not trying to ascribe any meaning to the patterns, just bring them to a conscious light.

By adding the "22" to the other two dual numbers, we get a set-of-three referencing the pattern "20, 21, 22". If we wish to make a correlation to some biologically influenced geophysical event(s), we find that the Equinoxes and Solstices variously occur on these numbers during March, June, September and December, or the 3rd, 6th, 9th and 12th months as seen from the Northern Hemisphere.

Interestingly, because correlations can be made between geophysical events and biological patterns, in that the environment can affect the biology of how one feels and the biology of life forms can affect the environment, comparisons can be made on different levels, one of which is to transcribe events into numbers from which can be correlated similar and dissimilar patterns which may or may not prove to be a valuable insight into interactive connections concerning conditions we might otherwise overlook or take for granted.

Again, I am not (in this moment) trying to ascribe any meaning to the correlations, I am only making a comparison... and sorting different items into categories which appear to be similar. And in this comparison, because I have a street-corner knowledge of biology, we find that the number "23" is missing in the foregoing account of amino acids. This number not only correlates to the number of shared chromosomes for the development of a child in reproduction, but that males and females share 22, with the 23rd having a distinction of individuality.

Let us also note that the tilt of the Earth's axis is (approx.) "23.5°", which provides us with the equation of 23.5 + 23.5 = 47... that is when we correlate the numbers as being references to the quantity of chromosomes. Let us also consider that this amount of tilt may have been slightly less in the past, or even slightly more (mentioned for those who are inclined to exercise oppositional comments to suggestions as if they are considerations that don't come to mind, thus giving themselves some attempted credit for thinking alternatively.) However, in terms of chromosome count, the "47" represents a condition called Trisomy. While there are a few recurring types, Trisomy 21 is most common and referred to as Down Syndrome. With respect to Trisomy 18, there are three forms: Full, Partial, and Mosaic.

Yet, let us do a bit of speculation with respect to the correlations involving the 23.5° tilt of the Earth's axis and the 23 chromosomes value, though it is said that the tilt oscillates between 22.1° and 24.5° at an (approximated) 41,000 years cyclical rate. If we add the variable that the planet's rotation speed was faster in the past during the stages of development called the primordial soup (or broth), and consider that the tilt may have been coupled to a cyclical rate of the Earth's spin acting as a type of experimenter's centrifuge, conditions for the origin of life would necessarily have also had an influential "three" patterned occurrence to account for the triplet codes found in DNA and RNA... such as in the metaphor where the early building blocks of like were like a pagan culture which worshiped the Sun... a Source of warmth, light and energy coupled to three-patterned stroboscopic dawn-noon-dusk repetition if we consider the rate of rotation was on the order of from a 2- to -8 hours cycle. If so-called multi-celled and complex humans can come to worship the Sun with its three moments and derive the notion of a Trinity from it or create a pantheon of three Hindu gods, (etc...), then it is not too difficult to consider that the early and sensitive materials of evolution might well have also been.

Further more, in this imaginative exploration of numerical correlations, if we associate the evolutionary development of the different life forms to different rates of rotation occurring over billions of years, we find humanity having arisen when the rate of rotation was in the 23 hour range, just as the Cambrian Explosion of life forms. Hence, let us ask the pointed question: Are Humans rotation-rate specific? If we are rotation rate specific and arose when the Earth's rate of rotation was 23 hours in duration, then the human species may not be able to survive on an earth with a rotation rate that is 24 or more hours in duration. There may be a built in biological limitation which will create an internally-directed extinction of the species long before the Sun burns out or the planet's resources are used up. If this is true for other life forms, then what will occur when the rotation rate changes as the Earth slows down... thus suggested as a factor which alters gravity, the incidence of solar irradiation and oxygen content of the atmosphere (because oxygen-producing life forms are affected)? How will this affect the axial tilt and how will this affect chromosomal counts? No less, let us suggest that this may have had some influence on the chromosomal count and that with development of chromosomal abnormalities involving a total count of 47, can we not ask if the change in the tilt is a representative image of a causal occurrence that affects those who are more sensitively susceptible to environmental changes, but that all of humanity may eventually be susceptible, resulting in a greater incidence of different chromosomal-"correlatable" occurrences... unless humanity can adapt to a slowing rate of rotation of the Earth, a slowing which may have an effect on the tilt, just as a fast spinning Earth may have had an effect on its relationship with the Early Moon billions of years ago and vice versa? In fact, there is a scenario of consideration concerning the topic of whether Earth spun on its side or not because of an accelerated rotation rate: Did the Early Earth Spin On its side?Were life forms more or less susceptible to environmental changes in the past? Will the presumed susceptibility increase in the future unless a species-wide adaptation takes place?

However, instead of "susceptibility" to environmental events which can cause changes in genetics, the ideas of random mutation an genetic drift are most often used to explain biological events instead of using these ideas to denote changes in susceptibility. In other words, mutations have to occur because of a susceptibility to changes, and this susceptibility has to be the result of an inherent design and/or due to chance.

Another interesting aspect of correlating numbers in genetics (biology) is the finding that while humans have 23 (46) chromosomes, their so-called closely-related genetic cousins have 24 (48). A chromosome fusion is being used to form the opinion that determines the differences in our lineage. However, while we can say it occurred after the great apes split, we do not know exactly when it began, much less tell what environmental conditions existed afterwards, in terms of the Earth's rotation rate, exact content of atmospheric oxygen, how much axial tilt of the Earth existed, magnetic field strength (available but not yet discerned in conventional appraisals of Paleomagnetic formation?), solar flare events, etc... and can we learn anything from looking at present day as well as ancient myths discussed in terms of the The Earth Before the Flood.

If the last common ancestor of chimps and humans occurred as early as 13 million years ago during the Miocene, how fast was the Earth spinning (not only acting as a type of laboratory centrifuge, but as an indicator of how fast the three-pattern Sun: dawn-noon-dusk was "flashing" like a strobe light)... and how fast is its fusion effects occurring as it proceeds on a path to becoming a red giant, is thought by some to be on a course which will consume the inner most three planets. In any event, in correlating the number "three" found in DNA and RNA and considering that this pattern had to be influenced either internally and/or externally, the fact that we can identify the three moments (phases) of the Sun with influencing cognitive phenomena such as the Christian Trinity and Hindu Trimurti (amongst hundreds of other examples found in other subject areas), provides us with a numerically referencing correlation that the Triplet Codon system found in DNA and RNA, as well as the fusion event which occurred with chromosome 2, may well be related and signifies a means by which we can predict future evolutionary events... such as a change in the code and more chromosomal fusion events to occur as adaptive responses to the environmentally-based pressures on biology.

Since the mid-1800s, biologists have generally shared the belief that all living things descended from a single common ancestor. Based on fossil evidence and comparative anatomy, Charles Darwin proposed that humans and great apes—which include chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans–share a common ancestor that lived several million years ago. More recent research has propped up Darwin's theory of common descent (also called common ancestry): genome analysis reveals the genetic difference between humans and chimps to be less than 2 percent. In other words, humans and chimps have DNA sequences that are greater than 98 percent similar.

While the genetic similarity between human and ape strengthened Darwin's theory, a significant, unexplained discrepancy remained. While great apes all have 48 chromosomes (24 pairs), humans have only 46 (23 pairs). If humans and apes shared a common ancestor, shouldn't both have the same number of chromosomes in their cells?

The phases through which chromosomes replicate, divide, shuffle, and recombine are imperfect, as DNA is subject to random mutations. Mutations do not always produce harmful outcomes. In fact, many mutations are thought to be neutral, and some even give rise to beneficial traits. To corroborate Darwin's theory, scientists would need to find a valid explanation for why a chromosome pair is missing in humans that is present in apes.

A fundamental part of the process by which science is done involves developing a testable prediction, also known as a hypothesis. Scientists offered two possible explanations for the discrepancy: Either the common ancestor had 24 pairs, and humans carry a fused chromosome; or the ancestor had 23 pairs, and apes carry a split chromosome. Their focused research led them to find a mutation on one human chromosome that explained what had happened.

In 2005, a peer-reviewed scientific journal published results of the tests. It turns out that chromosome 2, which is unique to the human lineage of evolution, emerged as a result of the head-to-head fusion of two ancestral chromosomes that remain separate in other primates. Three genetic indicators provide strong, if not conclusive, evidence of fusion. First, the banding (or dye pattern) of human chromosome 2 closely matches that of two separate chromosomes found in apes (chimp chromosome 2 and an extra chromosome that does not match any other human chromosome). Second, a chromosome normally has one centromere, or central point at which a chromosome's two identical strands are joined. Yet remnants of a second, presumably inactive centromere can be found on human chromosome 2. And third, whereas a normal chromosome has readily identifiable, repeating DNA sequences called telomeres at both ends, chromosome 2 also has telomere sequences not only at both ends but also in the middle.

In referring back to the number values for the DNA and RNA examples, we come up with 1 less then the 64 amino acids detailed to account for the recurrence of the 21 amino acids used by our bodies. (The old view was 20.) In addition, three numbers in each of the sets (1, 3, 7) are the same while one is different, which also gives reference to the fact that DNA has one molecule of oxygen less than RNA. Hence, a 3 -to- 1 ratio patterns emerges that is found also in the set of three Stop codons and 1 Start codon. While we might also provide a reference to the D (right-handed) and L (left-handed) forms as part of a larger pattern that can be included, it need not but be mentioned for the present simple orientation used in the foregoing correlations. And nor do we need to delve into the numerical patterns by applying them to the language of computers whose underlying two-patterned 0's and 1's is accentuated by electronic circuitry combined with the mathematics of boolean logic that is though to be instructive in assisting the development of a three-based (quantum) formula of computing such as might be figured by the example: -1,0,1... though we could indulge in a bit of abstraction and use any form of symbolic referencing system so long as we keep the usage of symbols in a recognized and articulated coherency.

As part of the foregoing "numerological" exercise, let us... for the sake of conversation (or devil's advocacy), adopt the view that all of the above is a bit of nonsense numerology presenting us with a set of coincidences due to arbitrarily placed letters and words and a fanciful imagination. Yet, when we find the same patterns occurring in multiple subjects, we will have to similarly advance the view that many people over large expanses of time in different cultures have been deliberately or unknowingly participating in the same type of coincidence-making, including hard-nosed scientists and mathematicians, not to mention the supposed "soft" intellectualisms of theologians, musicians and philosophers who also participate in creating numerous sets-of-three variously labeled. This itself can not be a coincidence... unless of course one wants to label it as such because it presents them with too difficult a problem since a knowledge of multiple subjects is a requirement and mathematicians need only know one... or two... or even three, since such a quantity fits well in their mathematical scheming.

It doesn't take a genius to appreciate the about sets-of-three values as a Mathematical variable awaiting a larger theory, but mathematicians are frequently found to be too "humbly arrogant" to look beyond the confines of their immediate domain to fully acknowledge that many mathematical theories await the arrival of application outside the field of mathematics in order to substantiate their value as being more than just another pretty face of mathematically inclined esthetic endeavors to assist a mathematician in carving out their niche' in history as having sculpted a beautiful mathematical masterpiece.