I did mean 50% because neither Kirk had the correct DNA so nice Kirk had half his DNA missing or switched on incorrectly - that must mean that 50% is of his DNA was doubled up i.e. replicated incorrectly (on my theory at least) with the second Kirk getting a different 50% doubled up through replication. With Thomas Riker it's harder to tell since they were genetically exact at the point of creation so it's possible that one was entirely replicated. Which one was always a matter for debate.
What? "Neither Kirk had the correct DNA"? What does that mean? DNA codes for RNA, which codes for proteins, which are expressed in cells as...ah, hell, forget the details. We're not made out of DNA
. It's just one small component of our bodies.
In both "The Enemy Within" and "Second Chances", the duplicates are indistinguishable
from the originals. That means they must
have the same masses, too. That
requires a doubling of everything
about the transporter subject, i.e., a 100% increase, not a 50% increase.
So you mean 100%, not 50%.
Nope I mean as far as Kirk goes, IMO each Kirk was 50% ish real Kirk and 50% replicated Kirk.
Roughly 50% of our behaviour is caused by our DNA and the other 50% is caused by our life experiences. Since each Kirk had the same life experiences it seems to me that the two most likely causes of the difference in behaviour were disease of some kind (and I don't recall a medical exam confirming either Kirk was diseased, which would have been treatable) or each had a portion of incorrectly replicated DNA. Since this research was not around in the sixties, I would not expect it to feature as part of the plot but we do know that the transporter can screw with DNA (Tuvix) so as far as hypotheses go I'm happy with it.
I'm not telling you what you should believe but I definitely believe that each Kirk was 50% replicated.