this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2025
34 points (100.0% liked)

Ask Lemmy

36138 readers
2058 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Looking only at genetic code, is it possible that there have ever been two genetically identical people who are not twins (or clones)? How many medically distinct human beings can their actually be?

I'm assuming that we're only talking about biologically modern human beings. So the genes that make us human cannot be eligible for variation.

If we don't include environmental factors and non-DNA genetic material, what is the actual number of genes that can vary from one person to another? Do we even understand the human genome well enough to make this kind of calculation?

I'm assuming from combinatorial math that it's more humans than can ever exist through the course of the entire universe. But what is the actual number? If those genes are varied at random, how many people will it take before they say a 50% chance that two of them are identical? For example, it only takes 23 people to have a 50% chance that at least two of them have the same birthday.

Edit: I found an interesting article about the complications with trying to calculate this number. The number seems to be on the order of 10^(tens or hundreds of thousands)

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 16 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (2 children)

Human genetic code has maybe 0.2% variation in base pairs, the average individual gene has maybe 13 thousand base pairs, and the whole code has about 3.1 billion base pairs.

This is crappy, quick and dirty math, but this might be one of those high-complexity situations (like weather modeling) where minimal detail can be closer to the truth than an intermediate amount anyway. So, we'll model it as a random selection of 0.2% differentiated genes, meaning ~240,000 take ~500, which comes out to a number with 1556 digits. The amount needed to get a 50/50 chance of a repeat will be lower, with 777, almost 778 digits.

If you allow weird, implausible and mostly stillborn combinations it's closer to 2^~240,000^ . If you include mutations, it gets much much higher to the point of basically being undefined. It's more about how many changes is still human, and after that how big a genome a cell can handle.

[–] cRazi_man@europe.pub 15 points 3 hours ago

My go-to insult from now on is going to be:

"6.213165126500310316378124236349955462389737376162847388361.. x 10^1555^ possibile human specimens, and somehow I'm unfortunate enough to have to come across you."

[–] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 7 points 4 hours ago

Awesome answer! Thanks.

[–] chunes@lemmy.world 14 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

A conservative estimate for the number of 'people combinations' is about 10^4,515,450.

There are 10^19 grains of sand on earth.

There are 10^50 atoms on earth.

There are 10^68 possible orderings for a deck of cards.

There are 10^80 atoms in the observable universe.

There are 10^120 possible chess games.

[–] magic_lobster_party@fedia.io 3 points 3 hours ago

Imagine one new chess game is played every second. It would take until the heat death of the universe to finish all possible games (more than 10^100 years). That’s just chess. Human genome is magnitudes more advanced.

[–] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

What is that number based on and does it exclude mutations that would change the species or be biologically meaningless?

[–] chunes@lemmy.world 4 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

There are about 15 million single-nucleotide polymorphisms (i.e. 'spots in the genome that can change') that commonly change in the human genome. For each of those spots, there are 2 possible alleles. So 2^15,000,000 ~= 10^4,515,450.

And yes, this number is excluding "batshit" mutations that don't make sense. This is a conservative estimate because it doesn't include rare SNPs or structural variants (i.e. when lots of nucleotides get removed, inserted, or flipped).

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

This is also a decent answer, using a different approximation. If someone asks again I'll just say "a few orders of magnitude of orders of magnitude", since it covers both. The discrepancy comes from me implicitly assuming more correlation between variations, of which there is some IRL.

Some of them do nothing, though. If you just go by appearance, unrelated dead ringers already happen!

[–] erin@piefed.blahaj.zone 10 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

Humans have 3.2 billion base pairs. There likely has not and will never be two identically genetic humans, even identical twins are not perfectly identical due to mutations.

Now, obviously a lot of the genetic code needs to be similar, certain parts of our genetic code needs to be similar, so it isn't literally 3.2*10^9 factorial, but even a small fraction of that number is essentially infinite. I highly doubt there has ever been two identical humans or ever will be.

3.2 billion factorial is essentially arbitrarily large. It isn't even really useful to think of it as a number, as we couldn't even calculate what the number is. Visualize the largest quantity you can conceptualize, then square it until you get bored.

[–] Apeman42@lemmy.world 10 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

I'm no scientician, but wouldn't mutation mean that the possible number of gene combinations is constantly growing? And maybe even making previously non-viable permutations viable, which seems like it would really fuck with the math?

[–] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago

There would still be a limit as long as the species was constrained to modern homo sapien. Mutating yourself out of the species would mean you're no longer in the set of things.

[–] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

I'm also no scientitian. I believe any mutations would have to be within the existing genome or else it would no longer be a biologically modern human.

Let's add the additional stipulation that we are not adding any meaningless genes. I know that there are a lot of them, but I'm just curious about what the math would look like and if we even have the knowledge about the genome to know which gene variations are meaningful.

I'm thinking of the doppelganger thought that experiment. Am I really the only person like me that has ever lived or what level or live? Or is it statistically possible that another genetically identical version of me could exist within the timeline of the universe (as I mentioned, with a 50% probability or better)?

[–] yesman@lemmy.world 6 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

The number of possible combinations of genes is so large that the chance of a random duplication is vanishingly small. Even twins aren't exact copies because they'll have mutations unique to themselves.

[–] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

The question isn't whether it's large. The question is how large is it? Right now the human population doubles every 40 years and that rate seems to be increasing.

If humans somehow expanded in population and efficiently consumed all of the energy in the universe, then that means maybe somewhere on the order of 10^65 possible people (according to some very bad napkin math just for the sake of argument).

Are there that many unique combinations of human DNA, ignoring mutations which would change the species or have no impact on biology?

[–] Nemo@slrpnk.net 6 points 2 hours ago

To add on top of the other answers: On top of all potential genetic variation, you also have environmental and experiential variables that further differentiate people.

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 5 points 4 hours ago

If you truly shuffle a deck of cards, you are likely to come up with a permutation that has never existed before.

The human genome is infinitely more complex than a deck of cards.

[–] owenfromcanada@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 hours ago

At least 12.