On Monday, April 13, 2015 at 7:45:05 AM UTC-7, Adam Funk wrote:
> On 2015-04-13, Jerry Friedman wrote:
>
> > On 4/13/15 7:26 AM, Adam Funk wrote:
> >> On 2015-04-09, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>
> >>> Adam Funk <
a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I'm trying to figure out a "mystery" geocache whose puzzle consists of
> >>>> a sequence of the characters A, T, C, & G. I expect to get some
> >>>> numbers or numbers & a few letters to get coördinates of the form
> >>>> <N##°##.###' W###°##.##'> (degrees, minutes, & decimals of minutes).
> >>>> Just <### ###> for the decimas of minutes would suffice, actually.
> >>>>
> >>>> Is there any standard or semi-standard way of representing DNA as
> >>>> numbers? I found this (page 2)
> >>>> <
http://www.mrsec.psu.edu/education/nano-activities/dna/dnas_secret_code/dnas_
> >>> secret_code.pdf>
> >>>> but it seems to be a toy educational example & gave gibberish for the
> >>>> sequence I'm looking at.
Yeah, I suppose lat and long in a mix of numbers and upper and lower case letters isn't very useful.
> >>> There are four letters, hence 16 pairs,
> >>> which suggest coding in hexadecimal,
> >>
> >> I'll take a look at that, but I'd be surprised at that level of
> >> indirection.
Do you know anything of the encoder's inclinations and areas of interest?
> > Anyway, isn't the same as converting each of the bases to two bits (in
> > any of the 24 possible ways)?
Sixty-four permutations of three in the table on page two, but you really need a system that only yields ten.
How do you combine four elements into only ten arrangements?
> Yes. But I'd expect this kind of a puzzle to have a "sort of
> deterministic" solution, i.e.: there is one correct way to decode the
> clue, & the coördinates are there once you hit on it (as with the
> atomic numbers). OTOH, this approach involves writing a computer
> program to generate 24 different but equally valid decoding schemes, &
> seeing which one produces coördinates in the vicinity of the given
> waypoint. That's why I was asking about a "standard or semi-standard
> way of representing DNA as numbers".
Well, would the coder have any specialist knowledge in that area? Maybe he/she might think of what he/she considers that standard to be something "everybody knows".
How far apart are waypoints, usually? If one coordinate where you found the geocache is (coincidentally) 26.277, then you can guess the likely range of the same coordinate for the next. That will give you a quick and dirty go/no go indication for any scheme; just see if the first candidate decoded number is in or near that range (assuming things like kayaking are Allowed for). If so, keep using that algorithm- if not, skip to the next.
You know, in actual DNA the sequence given will be paired with a different sequence; A with T, C with G, etc. Is the coder fond of two-step procedures?
Sorry, that's the best I can do right now.
Dr. HotSalt