The Physics of Living Matter for Tomorrow
In association with the 17th HFSP Awardees Meeting
Champalimaud Centre for the Unknown, Lisbon, Portugal, 9 July 2017
Daniel Riveline, University of Strasbourg, France
Karsten Kruse, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
Guntram Bauer, HFSPO Strasbourg, France
Life Sciences have benefitted greatly from knowledge originating from other fields. For example,
major breakthroughs in developmental biology were achieved by advanced optical tools that allow
high resolution live imaging in combination with new sophisticated chemical probes for labelling
molecules of interest with unprecedented precision. While tool development has provided
breakthrough advances in biological techniques, there is still a growing need for the Life Sciences
to formulate new concepts for understanding natural phenomena at higher organizational scales
(Bialek 2015; Popkin, 2016). Efforts to decipher how the functioning of individual parts make the
whole cell or organism work promises trajectories for new discoveries (Loughlin 2015).
It is in particular the Interface of Physics and Biology that has proven to provide a most fruitful
environment for generating new concepts and to deepen our knowledge of fundamental process in
the life sciences. At the interface between these two disciplines, research over the last decade has
unraveled new ways of understanding, for example, morphogenesis during development, signal
processing in protein and genetic networks, and roles of fluctuations for determining the fates of
cells and tissues. Mixed teams of biologists and physicists are now commonly discussing
experimental approaches and theoretical ideas, as well as ordering genome wide data on a regular
basis. To be successful at this frontier demands multi-faceted training to equip scientists with skills
and knowledge for collaborative projects with scientists from other disciplines.
Such collaborations are not straightforward though. Standard training in Biology and in Physics
places the focus on different aspects, and concepts are rarely translated from one discipline to the
other in a comprehensive manner. For example, one would like to achieve that the biologists’
understanding of the collective behavior of molecules merges with the physicists understanding of
the collective behavior of matter (Bialek 2015; Needleman 2015). At the same time, one would like
the physicists to consider signaling networks and adaptation in their formalisms.
1
What makes matters worse is the fact that currently there is no international forum for scientists
in charge of training programs to share their experience, exchange informally so as to learn how
to transmit knowledge from Physics to students in Biology and vice-versa. Many institutions
cannot offer courses covering the whole breadth of Physics, Math, Engineering, Chemistry and
Biology.
Could a global level network on living matter remedy these shortcomings? Would remote lectures
and practical sessions offered in different fields by partner institutions lead to an improved
understanding? Is it thinkable that an international effort in this direction could nurture young
scientists and students across the world? Could existing local strengths be harnessed so as to
complement gaps within this global network?
To discuss these questions based on existing training examples, the meeting will provide a unique
opportunity to discuss the feasibility of such an international effort. Discussions between leading
scientists from Physics and Biology with a strong interest in education and training, will allow the
audience to exchange and debate teaching and collaborative research experiences around the
world.
References
Popkin G. The physics of life. 2016. Nature 529, 16.
Loughlin DT. Calculating new parameters. 2015. Trends in Cell Biology 25, 709.
Needleman D. The material basis of life. 2015. Trends in Cell Biology 25, 713.
Bialek W. Perspectives on theory at the interface of physics and biology. 2015. arXiv:
1512.08954v1 [physics.bio-ph]
2