We say something is “rocket science” when it is stunningly complex. But perhaps “neuroscience” would be a more apt metaphor—the more we learn about the brain, the more new questions arise. Case in point is a seemingly simple question: How do brain cells communicate? We know they use chemicals to send messages to one another. But exactly how do neurons release these neurotransmitters and then ready themselves to send out another rapid-fire message?
This operation takes place on a vanishingly small scale—scientists cannot actually watch the process, so they have to rely on less direct measures to determine what is going on. And because such data can often be interpreted in multiple ways, a controversy about neurotransmitter release has persisted for decades. Recent advances in laboratory techniques have escalated the debate, and the promise of finally understanding this basic cellular mechanism has set the stakes high. The answer is vital because the chemicals in our brain are implicated in everything from thought and emotion to mental illness, addiction and disease.
This article was originally published with the title How Do Neurons Communicate?.
See what we're tweeting about
1 Comments
Add CommentNeuroscience would be a much better metaphor for extreme complexity than rocket science. We don't know really what the "retrograde messenger" is that affects patterns for learning in the brain, and we don't know how distributed processes in the brain come together to produce a unified conscious experience. The retrograde messenger problem and the "binding problem" are some of the largest problems in science right now. They have the potential to revolutionize our thinking about the world and our place in it. It is getting to the point that every area of science is converging on the brain -- physics, chemistry, biology, psychology, history, archaeology, genetics, etc. I think Neuroscience, along with genetics, is the quintessential science. The holy grail.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this