It's actually kind of weird that we can comprehend the law of gravity, or that we can understand quantum mechanics, enough at least to make computers.

Unlike optogenetics, where there are existing nonprofits that give away the DNA for free or at cost, expansion microscopy requires chemicals to be used, so having a company that makes the chemistry kit that anybody can use can save time.

I think the definition will change as we learn more, but my working definition of solving the brain is: one, we can model, maybe in a computer, the processes that generate things like thoughts and feelings, and two, we can understand how to cure brain disorders, like Alzheimer's and epilepsy. Those are my two driving goals. One is more human-condition oriented, and one more clinical.

Maybe we'll understand more about how the universe came to be, and what forces drove it in the early days and which forces drive it now.

Many of the projects that we do that appear quite successful, it's actually often the second or third time we've given it a try.

One of the things that got me transitioning from physical science to brain science was asking, Why do we understand so much about the universe?

The skill-providers want to have more impact and solve problems; the problem people want new tools to get their problems solved.