Key points

• The 2026 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine went to Peter Hegemann, Georg Nagel and Karl Deisseroth for light-gated ion channels and optogenetics.
• It began in the early 1990s with one small question: how does a green alga swim toward the light?
• About thirty years later, the same idea gave a blind man in Paris enough sight to find a notebook on a table.
• For anyone thinking about the future, it shows how far one small signal can ripple, and why it pays to keep room for questions nobody can justify yet.

In the early 1990s, at a Max Planck Institute in Germany, a scientist called Peter Hegemann wanted to know something small: how does a single-celled green alga, the kind that turns pond water green, find its way toward the light?

He wasn’t building a product, and nobody had asked him to fix a problem, so he followed the question because he was curious.

On Monday 5 October in Stockholm, that question shared the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. Hegemann, Georg Nagel and Karl Deisseroth were named “for their discoveries concerning light-gated ion channels and optogenetics”.

How pond algae led to the Nobel Prize for optogenetics

Here’s the path, one step at a time.

Hegemann and Nagel found the answer to the alga question. It was a protein, now called channelrhodopsin, that sits in the outer skin of the cell and opens like a gate the moment light hits it.

Then Karl Deisseroth’s lab at Stanford put the gene for that protein into the nerve cells of rats, and in a landmark 2005 paper they showed that a flash of blue light could fire those cells on cue.

That gave scientists a light switch for the brain. They could turn chosen nerve cells on and off and watch what changed, which the chair of the Nobel Committee described to STAT News as “mapping the brain in a way that we could once only dream of”.

Then, in May 2021, a team in Paris led by Jose-Alain Sahel and Botond Roska reported in Nature Medicine on a 58-year-old man who had been blind for close to four decades from an eye disease called retinitis pigmentosa. They injected his eye with genes for a light-sensing protein first found in green algae, and gave him goggles with a camera that turned what was in front of him into amber light.

With the goggles on, he reached out and touched a notebook on the table 92 per cent of the time, according to the Sorbonne University release. Without them, he couldn’t do any of the visual tasks. He could count glass tumblers as well, though what he saw was grainy black and white, not enough to read a page or know a face.

So it took about thirty years to get from a pond to a patient, and nobody standing at the pond in the early 1990s could have drawn that line.

The alga was a small signal nobody could read for thirty years

This is close to a perfect picture of what foresight is for.

A small signal is the odd thing you notice before it means anything. In May 2024 I wrote that foresight means looking for “emerging trends, weak signals, and potential disruptions before they become mainstream“. A green alga turning toward the sun is about as weak as a signal gets. It sat in every pond on earth, in plain sight, and for most of those thirty years it looked like it meant nothing much at all to anyone outside a lab.

That’s the hard part of signals. The one that matters rarely looks like it matters on the day you see it.

One small question can ripple a long way

In April 2026 I wrote about Ripple Effects, and put it like this: “A small change in one space… creates a much larger shift somewhere else.” And then: “The original signal doesn’t stay contained. It moves.”

Watch it move here.

The first ripple was a protein that opens to light, in plant biology. The second was a light switch for nerve cells in rats, in brain science. The third was a man in Paris finding a notebook, in eye medicine, a field the pond question never had in mind, and each ripple reached somewhere the one before it couldn’t see.

Where the fourth and fifth go is anyone’s guess, and that matters, because your business is full of small questions that could travel just as far.

Foresight is preparation for many futures

No forecast in the early 1990s had a blind patient at the end of it, and none could have.

So the job is to get ready for several futures at once, instead of betting everything on the one you think is most likely. In January 2026 I wrote that foresight works best as “preparation for the conditions under which decisions are made“, and that done well, it “builds the habit of asking better questions before urgency takes over.”

Futures, plural, is the point. In October 2025, writing about solar roofs on cars, I called one section Many Energies, Many Futures, and said that when we’re curious about new kinds of energy, we find ways to make them work, but “If we’re defensive, we find reasons they can’t.“

The pond question could have led nowhere, and a defensive budget would have said so early. It could have led to a lab tool and stopped there. It led to a Nobel Prize and a man touching a notebook, and if you want to be ready for an outcome like that, keep more than one door open for longer than feels comfortable.

Why the odd question rarely gets an hour

In March 2025 I wrote that the best research isn’t about finding one answer, it’s about asking better questions. In the same piece I said that “every strategist, every business leader, every decision-maker is a researcher.”

The alga question was asked long before anyone had a question about the brain, or about blindness, to hang it on.

Most budgets want to see a payoff by next June, and when money’s tight that makes sense, because you can’t pay wages with a maybe, but it means the odd question, the one nobody can justify yet, never gets an owner, a name beside it or even a spare hour.

The ripple could run well beyond a lab. A business that only funds what it can already explain might end up very good at last year’s problems. The people closest to the work often notice the strange thing first, like the customer who keeps asking for something you don’t sell, or the part that wears out in a way it shouldn’t, and that’s usually where they stop, because there’s no line in the plan for it.

My position is plain. A small, steady amount of time for curiosity is worth protecting, even when you can’t say what it’s for, because nobody can know in advance which question will end up mattering.

What you could do this week

Start with one question nobody in your business is paid to ask.

Write it down.
Put a person’s name next to it.
Give it an hour a month, and leave it alone for a year before you judge it.

At the end of that year, sit down and ask what they found. It might be nothing much, or it might be the first step of something that takes thirty years to reach the people it’s for.

And while you’re at it, think back. What were you curious about years ago that turned out to matter?

Questions people ask

What did the 2026 Nobel Prize in Medicine go to?

It went to Peter Hegemann, Georg Nagel and Karl Deisseroth for their discoveries about light-gated ion channels and optogenetics. Their work lets scientists switch chosen brain cells on and off with light, so they can see what each cell does.

What is optogenetics, in simple words?

Optogenetics puts a light-sensitive protein, first found in green algae, into chosen cells. When light shines on those cells, they switch on. Scientists use it to study the brain, and a team in Paris used a version of it to give a blind man partial sight in 2021.

What does the optogenetics Nobel Prize teach us about foresight?

It shows that a small, odd question can ripple into fields nobody had in mind, in this case thirty years later. Foresight means noticing small signals early, getting ready for more than one possible future, and giving curious questions time before anyone can say what they’re for.

Sources

• Nobel Prize press release, 5 October 2026.
• STAT News, 5 October 2026: 2026 Nobel Prize in Medicine awarded for brain research tool called optogenetics.
• Sorbonne University, 24 May 2021: Optogenetic Methods Restore Partial Vision in a Blind Patient.
• Sahel, Roska et al., Nature Medicine, 24 May 2021: Partial recovery of visual function in a blind patient after optogenetic therapy.
• Ophthalmology Times, May 2021, and STAT News, 24 May 2021, on the same study.

Choose forward.

If you’d like a short read every Tuesday on what’s coming and what it means for your work: welcome.morrismisel.com/join