Schrödinger's Path for Bioimaging Research

I believe anyone who has studied physics knows the name of the physicist Erwin Schrödinger. However, few people may know that this renowned physicist wrote a book titled "What is Life?" in his later years, and even fewer have likely picked it up to read. In the introduction to this book, published in 1943, he wrote, "How can the events in space and time which take place within the spatial boundary of a living organism be accounted for by physics and chemistry?" This clearly states that "life phenomena are spatiotemporal patterns," and it has become the motivation for my research, which investigates life phenomena through imaging.

So far, I have investigated changes in "things," such as calcium and magnesium ions, which are responsible for intracellular information transmission; cyclic nucleotides; the phosphorylation of various enzyme groups downstream of their signals; and adenosine triphosphate (ATP), lactate, and pyruvate, which are involved in intracellular energy metabolism. I have also been tracking changes in "events," such as cytoskeletal movements, the membrane potential of nerve cells and mitochondria, and even cell temperature. While I have primarily used fluorescence imaging methods for this research, by varying fluorescent dyes and fluorescent proteins, it has become possible to simultaneously acquire multiple intracellular signals, such as mitochondrial membrane potential, intracellular magnesium ions, and ATP. Furthermore, by analyzing the correlation of these multiple signals, I am investigating the "entanglement" of intracellular signals.

If you ask whether I am satisfied with the progress I have made in my research on imaging life phenomena as they change in real time, the answer is not at all. Having continued this work, I am more aware than ever of the difficulties of imaging research and am full of dissatisfaction. No matter how hard we try, it will likely be impossible to investigate all the "things" and "events" within a cell using current approaches. I cannot argue against the criticism that "we are only studying what we happen to have the methods to study." On the other hand, even if we could develop methods to investigate all "things" and "events" in the future, we still lack the methods to decipher the vast amounts of constantly changing data and to investigate their complex "entanglement." I believe it is crucial not only to examine correlations but also to incorporate methods developed in other fields, such as those for determining causality and big data analysis.

The research to understand what is happening inside a tiny cell continues today, involving various fields. It seems to me that the research path (or is it a curse?) that Schrödinger described in his small book is far from over.