Random reflections on governance and the issues affecting us all.
When FDR said that the only thing we had to fear was fear itself, he hit on a truly fundamental issue: it is fear which gums up the works on any project, sets the stage for misunderstanding, and encourages us to pre-judge a problem or even a person, and thereby start us off from the wrong perspective.
While fear may be normal and natural, in all of us, it is one of those natural tendencies we must guard against, and seek to control with knowledge.
America was not founded as a perfect monument, but as a difficult, ongoing project. When our institutions falter, our responsibility is not to retreat from our founding ideals, but to reclaim them.
The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution do not belong to any single faction; they belong to all of us. As Frederick Douglass and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. demonstrated, these documents are not settled contracts to be discarded in frustration. They are promises to be kept and weapons to be wielded against injustice.
Our nation’s true genius has never been its initial conditions, but its capacity for self-correction. Drawing from the moral reasoning of our greatest leaders, we must recognize that a shared, universal obligation binds us to one another. Turning away from our civic inheritance out of dismay is a surrender we cannot afford.
My 2028 campaign is built on this conviction: the answer to an assault on democracy is to engage with its instruments with greater skill, clarity, and moral purpose. We will not cede our heritage to division. We will use it to build a more perfect union.
During my early career, a colleague once said: “Fred, Never let the Perfect be the enemy of the Good Enough.” I’ve always loved it, and it is a great motto in just about all situations. The closest source I’ve been able to find for it was Voltaire’s “The best is the enemy of the good.”, him quoting an Italian proverb, La Bégueule (1772)
At about the same time, I encountered something called the Pareto Principle, or the “80:20 Rule,” which says that 80% of problems in almost all fields are caused by 20% of the causes. There’s math to prove this, but an entertaining way of tying it back to The Perfect is to recognize that, in any given project, you’ll likely spend 80% of your effort just getting the last 20% of your goals accomplished, so don’t “let the Perfect be the enemy of the Good Enough,” unless you really have to! Below are a couple other variants I also like, which I gleaned from Wikipedia.
“Give them the third best to go on with; the second best comes too late, the best never comes.”
- Sir Robert Watson-Watt, Scottish radio engineer and father of practical radar (1935)
“If you never miss a plane, you’re spending too much time at the airport.”
- George Stigler, Nobel laureate in Economics (1982)
For decades, the ability of migratory birds to navigate thousands of miles across featureless oceans and terrain with pinpoint accuracy baffled biologists. While birds rely on landmarks, the position of the sun, and star patterns, their most remarkable navigation tool is an invisible one: an internal geomagnetic compass. At the center of this remarkable feat lies a specialized family of light-sensitive proteins called cryptochromes.
What Are Cryptochromes?
Cryptochromes are ancient, light-absorbing flavoproteins found across plants, animals, and fungi, where they primarily regulate circadian rhythms. However, in migratory songbirds, such as European robins, a specific variant known as Cryptochrome 4 (Cry4) has evolved to function as a sophisticated magnetoreceptor. [1]
Unlike a traditional mechanical compass that aligns strictly with magnetic north and south, Cry4 acts as an inclination compass. It allows birds to detect the angle at which Earth’s magnetic field lines intersect the planet’s surface, helping them distinguish between the equator (where field lines run parallel to the ground) and the poles (where they point almost vertically into the earth).
The Radical Pair Mechanism: Quantum Physics in Action
The leading scientific model for how cryptochromes sense magnetic fields is the radical pair mechanism. This process operates directly at the intersection of biochemistry and quantum mechanics:
1. Light Activation: When blue light enters the bird’s eye and strikes a Cry4 protein in the retina, an electron is transferred across a chain of amino acid residues (tryptophans) to a cofactor molecule called flavin adenine dinucleotide (FAD).
2. Radical Pair Formation: This rapid electron transfer leaves behind a pair of radicals, molecules that each possess an unpaired electron.
3. Quantum Coherence & Spin States: The spins of these two unpaired electrons are quantum-mechanically correlated, entangled at formation, and maintaining coherence long enough to be influenced by external magnetic fields. The radical pair continuously oscillates between two electronic spin states: the singlet state (where the spins are antiparallel) and the triplet state (where the spins are parallel). [2][3]
4. Magnetic Sensitivity: Because Earth’s magnetic field, though remarkably weak (around 25 to 65 microteslas), alters the relative timing and ratio of these singlet and triplet oscillations, it changes the ultimate chemical output and signaling lifetime of the cryptochrome protein.
“Seeing” the Magnetic Field
Because Cry4 proteins are densely packed within the retina of migratory birds, scientists hypothesize that birds do not simply “feel” magnetic fields; they literally see them. The chemical signals produced by activated cryptochromes are processed through visual pathways, specifically a specialized forebrain region known as Cluster N. [4] To a migrating bird, Earth’s magnetic field likely appears as a subtle, dynamic pattern of light and dark shading superimposed over their normal visual field, functioning essentially like a natural augmented-reality heads-up display.
Why It Matters
The discovery of cryptochrome-based magnetoreception has revolutionized quantum biology, proving that delicate quantum phenomena can persist and function inside warm, wet, and noisy biological environments, conditions that physicists had long assumed would destroy quantum coherence almost instantly. That single finding cracks open a door that connects half a dozen fields that previously had little reason to talk to each other.
Consider the engineering possibilities alone. If nature can sustain quantum coherence at body temperature in a protein smaller than a wavelength of visible light, then the design constraints we have accepted for quantum sensors, cryogenic cooling, electromagnetic shielding, and laboratory isolation, may be self-imposed limitations, not physical laws. Bio-inspired quantum magnetic sensors, modeled on the radical pair mechanism, could eventually operate at room temperature with sensitivities approaching those of superconducting quantum interference devices (SQUIDs) but at a fraction of the size, cost, and infrastructure. Navigation systems built on this principle could function entirely without GPS satellites, immune to jamming, spoofing, and signal denial in contested environments. For the Department of Defense, for commercial aviation, for autonomous vehicles, and for any system that currently depends on a satellite constellation controlled by a single government, that is not a marginal improvement. It is a structural change in what is possible.
But the deeper significance is what this discovery reveals about how knowledge itself works.
I like to think of the structure of scientific knowledge as something like a fishing net, if a fishing net could exist in more dimensions than three. The knots are the points where different disciplines converge on a shared problem. The lines running between them are the paths of connection: the mathematics, the experimental techniques, the shared physical principles that let one field’s insight travel to another. Cryptochrome magnetoreception is one of the most densely knotted points in the net.
Start pulling on any single thread and watch where it leads. Quantum mechanics, developed to explain atomic spectra and black-body radiation, provides the spin dynamics. Biochemistry identifies the protein and maps the electron transfer chain. Evolutionary biology asks how natural selection could have optimized a quantum-coherent process over millions of years, which turns out to require rethinking what evolution can “see” at the molecular level. Neuroscience traces the signal from retinal photoreceptor to Cluster N in the forebrain and asks how a bird’s brain encodes magnetic inclination as visual information. Behavioral ecology designs the migration experiments that first demonstrated something was happening that landmarks, stars, and sun position could not explain. Materials science and quantum engineering look at the biological solution and ask: can we build one?
No single discipline could have found this. The ornithologists knew the birds were navigating but could not explain the mechanism. The quantum physicists understood spin coherence but assumed biology was too warm and noisy. The biochemists could characterize cryptochrome but did not know it was a compass. The answer emerged only at the knot, where all the lines crossed.
That pattern repeats across the most important discoveries of the last century. Plate tectonics required geology, seismology, paleomagnetism, and oceanography to converge. The structure of DNA required X-ray crystallography, organic chemistry, and genetics. Climate science requires atmospheric physics, ocean chemistry, ecology, and computational modeling. The problems that matter most, the ones whose solutions change what humanity can do, live at the knots, not along any single line.
And here is what I take from that as a candidate, and as a citizen. When we defund basic research, when we silo disciplines, when we demand that every grant application specify its commercial application before the work begins, we are not trimming fat. We are cutting lines out of the net. And the net’s strength is not in any single line. It is in the density of the connections. Every line we cut makes every remaining knot weaker, including knots we do not yet know we will need.
References:
[1] J. Xu et al., “Magnetic sensitivity of cryptochrome 4 from a migratory songbird,” Nature, vol. 594, pp. 535–540, 2021.
[2] H. J. Hogben, T. Biskup, and P. J. Hore, “Entanglement and sources of magnetic anisotropy in radical pair-based avian magnetoreceptors,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 109, 220501, 2012.
[3] P. J. Hore and H. Mouritsen, “The radical-pair mechanism of magnetoreception,” Annu. Rev. Biophys., vol. 45, pp. 299–344, 2016.
[4] H. Mouritsen et al., “Night-vision brain area in migratory songbirds,” PNAS, vol. 102, no. 23, pp. 8339–8344, 2005.