DNA is NOT a helix
cooper_rusty at hotmail.com
Wed Feb 16 20:22:04 EST 2000
On Wed, 16 Feb 2000 19:04:00 -0600, Jim Hu <jimhu at tamu.edu> wrote:
>biegel at concentric.net wrote:
>> I am new to user groups, and I hope therefore that this message reaches
>> someone who is interested. I seek a brave person with a DNA laboratory.
>> I can prove that Form I DNA (i.e., "CCC" or covalently closed circular,
>> duplex DNA) from native sources is generally NON-helical.
>> Actually, this has been proven twice before, therefore I should say rather
>> that I can prove DEFINITIVELY that native circular DNA is NOT, topologically
>> speaking, a helix.
>.<snipped>....Why do I get the feeling that this is going to hinge on whatever
>the strict topological definition of a helix is?
BINGO!!! I was just curious if this guy would ever respond so that I
could find that out for myself.
Want more from your time online, like some cash?
More information about the Microbio