Gero Miesenboeck reengineers a brain

www.ted.com In the quest to map the brain, many scientists have attempted the incredibly daunting task of recording the activity of each neuron. Gero Miesenboeck works backward -- manipulating specific neurons to figure out exactly what they do, through a series of stunning experiments that reengineer the way fruit flies percieve light.
TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes. Featured speakers have included Al Gore on climate change, Philippe Starck on design, Jill Bolte Taylor on observing her own stroke, Nicholas Negroponte on One Laptop per Child, Jane Goodall on chimpanzees, Bill Gates on malaria and mosquitoes, Pattie Maes on the "Sixth Sense" wearable tech, and "Lost" producer JJ Abrams on the allure of mystery. TED stands for Technology, Entertainment, Design, and TEDTalks cover these topics as well as science, business, development and the arts. Closed captions and translated subtitles in a variety of languages are now available on TED.com, at www.ted.com/translate. Watch a highlight reel of the Top 10 TEDTalks at www.ted.com/index.php/talks/top10

[@LAnonHubbard]

That was a good talk. The guy was humble, likeable and explained himself well. Fascinating area of research.

[@egokick]

fascinating! more talks like this please

[@Harryjcrum]

This guy has mad vibes, he's on a tidal wave ting Dr Gero is my G

[@freesk8]

Wonderful! Great talk.

[@sinprelic]

finally a good TED talk. this one was *very* interesting.

[@Vellwander]

So happy for you guys.

[@Ko252]

Just, wow. Breath taking.

[@LordKilmir]

Fascinating. Liked and favorited.

[@vortical911]

@DancingHorses26 Not necessarily! Consider that there are light receptors in the eyes, and that the signals from the eyes are sent to the brain. Of course, our nerve cells would have to be re-engineered like the fruit fly's in order to be responsive to light flashes.

[@momentary_]

@CatastrophicDisease ...and there is it. The conflict between those who want to understand and control the mind and those who want nature to take it's course. I personally have very little faith in nature and welcome any improvement we can bring to the design, but it is good to know there will be people like yourself to keep atleast part of humanity grounded for reference. Don't change. We'll need people like you.

[@jevajevajevajeva]

@arconus Someone will soon do a TED talk on the subject of how and why we idealize the past.

[@arconus]

finally an interesting TED talk ... reminds me what ted used to be !

[@betadryl]

indeed, finally an interesting TED talk...

[@CatastrophicDisease]

@majinspy Yea, you explained it better than I could have.

[@jevajevajevajeva]

@arconus Point taken. I wonder if the supply of innovators has run dry?

[@khatack]

@CatastrophicDisease Could you elaborate on that please?

[@GboluwagaAdeyemi]

We need to think of this in a totally different perspective...This is great news! This means it can be possible to provide learning without actually going through the learning processes. Possible to induce principles that we experience in our daily lives to those who lack the ability in their senses...Create more efficient hearing-aids...Maybe even allow people the blind to see again...Probably by causing optic nerves to respond to certain visual spectrums..This is awesome!!!

[@Arm4g3dd0nX]

Wow! I should watch this anytime I don't feel sleepy enough to go to bed!

[@8DX]

@majinspy Also random mutation is not the only or most important influence, is it? I heard genetic drift is much more important - genomes on their own are full of variants and adaptability just within their combinations?

[@oicub2]

@opptynox Do you know the link ??

[@Ko252]

Seriously, where is the nobel price? This was just brilliant.

[@rohontsiawaks]

@underpantsjihad I totally agree with you this is amazing stuff. I imagine that after they perfect this tech there should be no sentient being that we shouldnt be able to control... that could be scary.

[@SSuperCuriouss]

Great research! But how do you know the altered neurons firing simply produces a pain in the brain, indirectly activating the critic and THEN changing its policy, based on the pain. The you mis-plotted the 'critic' neurons.

[@dookiecheez]

@DarncoL In science theory means something slightly different then in regular usage, laws aren't actually a higher tier in science. A law is typically part of a theory, as in thermodynamics there are laws which are of a different category then ideas. Proof is defined as sufficient evidence, and we already have that for evolution.

[@HKragh]

@DancingHorses26 Unless they use light that penetrates your scull easially (like radiowaves, which is the same as light) ;)

[@opptynox]

@oicub2 Watch Lawrence Krauss' talks (not on TED). You've cited his title!

[@otivaeey]

@arconus how do you define interesting? interesting to you?

[@matthewhintz4398]

perceive is spelled wrong in the description

[@Jontman42]

Interesting and good talk with great jokes :P

[@Dude902]

Starting off the talk with a DBZ action figure. Classy.

[@saasaasaa010101]

I wonder if this is realed to tavistock

[@P1ranh4]

@runbyway read the "selfish gene" it's not about the individual to get better, but the species as a whole. People may very well develop into something like in the series Heroes, if there is a good reason for them to do so (environmental pressure). Being able to walk up walls like spiderman or x-ray vision like superman while being totally badass won't benefit us to survive and probably won't develop. Btw: Batman has no superpowers except being ridiculously rich.

[@8DX]

All the flies are going through a decision-making process when they get to the place where both odours are the same (should I continue to the other area?). Well the light-signal is essentially sending the fly the message: "you have a bad feeling about this". Which makes it reject the new environment. I guess activating the same neurons would not have an effect if some environment-changing decision were not taking place.

[@Staldren]

I'm gonna build a temple in my bedroom in honor to the fruit fly and its selfless support to the scientific effort.

[@DarncoL]

@dookiecheez lol altho i do apologize for using evolution instead of abiogenesis. i am aware of the two but because every talks of evolution as if it was abiogenesis i say evolution instead for ease of communication

[@IamEyalMarcosLevit]

Heat is IR and you don't have to extract this from animals (btw, cats too have IR sight) you can take it from any organism and there are many microscopic organisms that are sensitive to different types of radiations. You are assuming that sight depends on the receptor, but in-fact it does not. It depends on the structure of the eye. Any type of receptor will give you visibility if installed inside the eye. Even if you use the receptors that help you feel heat on your skin!

[@WhichDoctor1]

@lilthug19908 "What if they have the neurones that control thrust become set off by some magnetic field. Then they placed the magnetic field around a pop machine." despite finding this talk hugely interesting and intriguing I couldn't help having the same thoughts. With any luck nothing like that will be possible while I'm alive but still its a little unnerving.

[@malcolmbryant]

@neoxavier A theory in science is not a hunch or a guess, it is the best explanation we have that is consistent with the data. No serious scientist doubts the overwhelming evidemce for evolution. Also, do not confuse a theory with a theorem. A mathematical theorem can be proved by logic. A scientific theory cannot be proved, only improved (or even disproved). By evidence. And reason.

[@malcolmbryant]

@lilthug19908 Agreed. Orwell's vision of the future in 1984 is tame by comparison. Will we become monsters?

[@JamesStrongisAwesome]

@andreeaweed It is only a matter of time before we do....that's the whole point of science.

[@8DX]

@majinspy "Genetic drift or allelic drift is the change in the frequency of a gene variant (allele) in a population due to random sampling." - this is NOT mutation. It's a process that kind of randomly chooses a path along evolutionary possibilities provided by mutation and environment I don't agree with your view of how mutation provides new functions - from what I've read/understood the main force is random mutation of duplicated dna with a previous functions, as well as frame-shift mutations.

[@IamEyalMarcosLevit]

Except for finding an adequate receptor. I'm sure there's an organism out there like some sort of a microbe that can detect IR.

[@Constantone]

I know this is wrong but when I hear people with German accents talking about the wonders of mind control and making decapitaiton jokes I just shiver. Move over Juan Williams.

[@Crazylalalalala]

@majinspy i like!! but boy would it be nice to have laser beam eyes.

[@nutsbutdum]

I think that humans know what's good or wrong in the absence of a critic because they have a conscious!

[@egokick]

@iviewthetube by redefine do you mean completely obliterate such a bizarre idea?

[@goneutt]

"The only trait that survives decapitation is vanity." Words everyone needs to hear.

[@webgpu]

@neoxavier do enlighten us with your wisdom. Could you, please, explain in what you believe, once you don't believe in evolution ??? and explain your point ?

[@squantay]

@DarncoL If you actually study science, you would understand that there is a difference between a theory that anyone can think up and the scientific theory that is a set of principles used to explain natural events. The scientific theory has evidence to support itself and endures the test of time because of this. It is totally different from the "theory" you have in mind. I would highly recommend watching the "Waking Up in the Universe" lectures on KZbin.

[@MarkoKraguljac]

"So it seems that the only trait that survives decapitation is vanity" More than funny :D

[@majinspy]

@8DX And where do you think the "gene variant" came from? Genes variate ...by mutating. A mutation is an error in the copying process. If there is no error...there is no variation to spread. Duplicated DNA IS a mutation. Frame-shifts are another type. Anything other than perfect fidelity to the original is by definition a mutation. Also, frame-shifts are rarely good. It is WAY too much change at one time to get away with. Suddenly changing dozens of amino acid codings is bad juju.

[@Crazylalalalala]

@runbyway if one never looks for something he rarely finds it.

[@BryAlrighty]

9 people disliked this video.. but they've realized their mistake through their critic, and will have placed the video in their favorites soon enough.

[@majinspy]

@runbyway Evolution is extremely slow and works based on environment. It isn't random. I'll describe it this way: there are more organisms born than can live. There are those that will pass on their genes, and ones that won't. The ones who don't usually failed a "fitness" test of some kind. They weren't fast enough. They didn't have enough children that could survive. They were too dumb. They were too slow...anything. Those are the ones who DON'T pass their genes on. The more fit ones do.

[@mamabari07]

Gero for Nobel prize.. :)

[@HigherPlanes]

Smart dude.

[@squantay]

@underpantsjihad You're right = =

[@khatack]

@honeyxbee18 No, you wouldn't be scared to know, you're scared precisely because you don't know. And you have no idea how important this research is; figuring out how the brain functions would be help a lot in healing mental disorders, such as depression. People are so attached to their personalities that they're irrationally afraid of ANY change. Little do they understand that our personalities change through random occurrence every day; I'd much rather we had a way to control the process.

[@Sinuev1]

I'd still consider a technological solution to be preferable to a biological one. It's easier and less risky to upgrade over time, can (one day) be incorporated directly into the optic nerve as a more integrated form of augmented reality, and can be controlled, tweaked, enhanced, and even recorded on the fly via a portable control device.

[@majinspy]

@8DX Genetic drift IS mutations. My understanding is it is basically benign yet useless mutations. Our DNA is full of mess that just doesn't get turned on and, therefore, mutations to it doesn't matter. This allows a buildup of genetic code that COULD do something. These things can become important later on. Maybe in the future having ear lobes that connect to the neck will cause one to have more offspring for some reason (the ladies like it :) ) Then a formerly useless thing is useful.

[@Yagmilner]

Really nifty, but let's not get ahead of ourselves, it will still take them about 100 years to map out completely the funtioning of a mouse brain at this rate. Good luck proving to yourself that you don't make choices.

[@koniginator]

Hey, I cut the heads off of plenty of D. Melanogaster in my lab, and I didn't get my own talk >:(

[@8DX]

HAHAH "It seems that the only trait that survives decapitation is vanity" HAHAHA... sooo true...

[@MilitantPeaceist]

@phoenixvgr lol

[@arconus]

@otivaeey no i meant interesting to yogi bear ... since it was my comment the assumption would be that i was referring to my interest and expressing my opinion would it not ?? ... however judging from the comment rating I am not alone :P

[@adolthitler]

@chessfan6 I did not compare the religious to a fruit fly. I respect fruit flies. I did say "their inner critic is trained to smack down any logic due to the feelings it arouses." They respond to their fears and uneasiness by blocking the logic. Thats not the same as "not capable of logic". Basically the religion is like an immunisation against logic that harms their religious belief. It arouses an emotional response that then voids the logic.

[@LeonidasGGG]

"Hacking" brains, learning without experience, physics competing (even overcoming) with psicology... wow!

[@IamEyalMarcosLevit]

Why do engineering to the protein? You just extract it from another organism that has IR sensitive receptors, no? In another TED talk they showed how it can install to neurons using proteins from another organism. I just need a set of scientists willing to do this for me (I think its illegal). Its probably not gonna happen :(

[@Gameboob]

The highest rated comment isn't even shown..? The KZbin staff have a little tweaking to do...

[@majinspy]

@runbyway Evolution doesn't work the way it does in Pokemon or Xmen. Organisms don't just get "better" with time. Species change over time as a result of natural selection. The offpsring of organisms are slightly different from their parents as a result of sexual reproduction and genetic mutations. This combined with natural selection (survival of the fittest) means over time, species will change as a result of selective pressure from their environment. It doesn't mean they get laser beam eyes.

[@AdenoidHynkelThe2nd]

SCIENCE!

[@squirreljester2]

@KamikazeChicken5000 I just always flag them all as spam. Eventually they will get enough flags that they wont be able to post on youtube anymore.

[@Janac]

You had me at "Dragon Ball Z"

[@chessfan6]

@DarncoL Why is that ridiculous? Samples dug very deep of the Earth tell us that the conditions in primordial Earth WERE very different from our own. Also, experiments have been done to confirm the fact that amino acids and some other necessary molecules for life can be created under those conditions without any external interference. There are plenty of reasons to believe that evolution is the process by which we got here. If he thinks religious people are stupid, he has a right to say it.

[@Shigren]

lol i love the dragon ball z reference!

[@sophielikestoparty45]

Post to reddit if you want any kind of stimulating feedback.

[@opptynox]

Sam Harris' work on the neuroscience of morality fall right in line with this gentleman. Hook these two up!!

[@sausage4mash]

Glad I didn't unsub from TED months on dross and then a little diamond

[@8DX]

@party489 Although I agree, this is the wrong place for some local (US) atheist activism - comments on TED vids should remain on topic.

[@SreeShankarLal]

Why dont you just ask Darren Brown?

[@Sinuev1]

I would think a biological option would be disorienting and annoying since you would either need to create or invoke some new perceptual layer, or you'd cripple another trying to co-opt it to represent the new data. You might be able to try to "blind sight" the perception by bypassing the V1. You'd "sense" the new perceptual information, but you wouldn't have any conscious recognition of it. That way it'd be easier for your brain to "partition" the new sense data within the co-opted region.

[@CookyCorvid]

@neoxavier Evolution has always been a theory. This doesn't stop it from being the most powerful explanatory model for life on planet earth. Don't be silly. :D

[@runbyway]

@Neylonx dude.. of course i believe evolution theory to that point. What i mean is 'extreme revolution' like monkey evolve to human. Since Babylon, monkey does not evolve to become human until rite now, i'm so sad. I hope human one day human will evolve more to become like superman. Or Rat to evolve become human.

[@CatastrophicDisease]

@khatack And then, we become machines. I'd rather be vulnerable and human.

[@DarncoL]

@adolthitler but as it is my main belief is respect for other beliefs, which is lost in a comment that says they are incapable of logic. All we've said is a theory one way or the other and that there is no proof either way, only that one way suits or respective views. as it is there hard proof either way, if there was we wouldn't have this convo. and until there is proof.. it is wrong (my opinion) to insult someone elses beliefs. even after but still..

[@chessfan6]

@adolthitler @adolthitler I think it's a huge stretch to compare the brain of a fruit fly to that of humans, and draw conclusions about human behaviour from that. Even the religious deserve more credit than that =P.

[@DarncoL]

@squantaya set of principles used to explain natural events.. until they are proven, when they are proven they become "law" (like newtons laws). something proven to be true. look it up if you wish lol but i'll watch those lectures, sounds cool also test of time?? it is not an old theory altho i do believe it will last very long and perhaps prove itself true, it has in itself not yet proven true. otherwise we would not have this convo and you would have sent me a link to the most

[@runbyway]

@majinspy Hopefully people who are poor like in South Africa, people who have been tortured and suffer by war e.t.c , people live in extremely cold country will revolutionize by "Evolution theory" to become a better being after fulfilling all criteria you mention (genetic mutation, natural selection, pressure of environment) . But i'm a bit sad that nothing of "evolution theory" have happened to any people (starting from Pharaoh era, Roman empire ..and even before this )

[@8DX]

@party489 Well actually you're right.. one has to be careful spaming though. I mean in my country we don't have god on the money.. so we're fine.

[@lilthug19908]

I really like this, except I don't like where hes going with this. What if they have the neurones that control thrust become set off by some magnetic field. Then they placed the magnetic field around a pop machine. Wouldn't the people with altered neurones be more likely to buy the pop, weather its good for them or not? . . . . . . . . . . . .The future scares me.......

[@Crazylalalalala]

@lucius cant really disprove something that has absolutely no basis. you can only replace it with something that does. evolution is one such thing, it has both reasoning and experimental data while creationism has neither. creationism is not even an hypothesis. it just a guess based on nothing but other the guesses. but again evolution does not deal with how things started only how they changed so it would only replace the parts that deal with all creatures that existed after he first few.

[@adolthitler]

@DarncoL Actually I was forced into a church congregation. I was beaten with a shoe, to dress appropriately for gods house, I was beaten with the shoe, to attend gods house, I was beaten with a shoe for asking why god was immoral for doing what he did. I did not use abiogenesis. I used genetics showing the tree of life as it branched out from common ancestors. I used the poor design of the eye to argue against design. No design then leaves evolution. Thats all the proof you should need.

[@iviewthetube]

Neuroscience is going to totally redefine "free-wiil."

[@CatastrophicDisease]

@neoxavier You serious, man? In science, Theory means something that IS proven, time and time again; when we say theory in everyday talk, we mean 'hypothesis' not theory. And if evolution didn't happen, what did? There are countless religions in the world; what makes YOURS right?

[@IamEyalMarcosLevit]

I know I was wrong about using our own heat sensitivity, it was a stupid example. I'll take your word about the rest, seems legit.

[@HiddenShaco]

SHINEEZEL

[@oicub2]

We are So f#cked

[@DarncoL]

@chessfan6 thats very true, but it still remains a theory. and if it is not proven i do not believe it is at all right to say that the religious are wrong.. if neither are proven then we might as well accept both, and i still believe you should not insult people because of there beliefs.. but thats just me props to you tho, lol i approve :P

[@neoxavier]

@OysterOfDoom evolution is still a theory... thats why they call it theory of evolution.. the theory is not proved yet... why should people with logic believe anything that has not been proved yet. btw, TMS has failed to elicit eye movements in humans, whereas prolongations of saccadic latency have been reported with TMS.

[@ThePeacant]

In a not too distant future, huh? Wonderful, soon we will be able to eliminate dissent, sadness, psychosis, etc. Have fun in a Brave New World, not too distant future