> Is the point that the information on the DNA gets copied onto RNA while the DNA remains intact?
Close, but I think it's more that the information gets used to assemble the RNA, and the resulting RNA also encodes information. Saying "copied onto RNA" can imply that the RNA previously existed in some kind of blank slate form.
So the arrow denotes a transfer/flow of information, but does not denote a chemistry 101 style reaction that changes a physical piece of DNA into a piece of RNA and then into a protein.
As an analogy - DNA is source code. The first arrow is the parser and creates RNA that is a reflection of the DNA. The second arrow (RNA to protein) is the compiler, taking the parsed code (RNA) and generating a program (protein) from it.
At no point is the source code consumed to create the program, akin to DNA.
Close, but I think it's more that the information gets used to assemble the RNA, and the resulting RNA also encodes information. Saying "copied onto RNA" can imply that the RNA previously existed in some kind of blank slate form.
So the arrow denotes a transfer/flow of information, but does not denote a chemistry 101 style reaction that changes a physical piece of DNA into a piece of RNA and then into a protein.