The American Physical Society's Global Physics Summit, the world's largest annual physics research conference, joining the March Meeting and April Meeting; the 2027 edition is announced for April 11-16, 2027 in Atlanta, Georgia.

Public lecture by Prof. Didier Queloz, FRS (Jacksonian Professor of Natural Philosophy, Cambridge; Professor of Physics, ETH Zurich), organized by the Swiss Physical Society at EPFL, on how exoplanet discoveries transformed understanding of planet formation and the search for life signatures in planetary atmospheres. Free admission for the general public.

Self-organization is a universal concept spanning numerous disciplines including mathematics, physics and biology. Chromosomes are self-organizing polymers that fold into orderly, hierarchical and yet dynamic structures. In the past decade, advances in experimental biology have provided a means to reveal information about chromosome connectivity, allowing us to directly use this information from experiments to generate 3D models of individual genes, chromosomes and even genomes. In this talk I will present a novel data-driven modeling approach and discuss a number of possibilities that this method holds. I will discuss a detailed study of the time-evolution of X chromosome inactivation, highlighting both global and local properties of chromosomes that result in topology-driven dynamical arrest and present and characterize a novel type of motion we discovered in knots that may have applications to nanoscale materials and machines.

Far-from-equilibrium processes constantly dissipate energy while converting a free-energy source to another form of energy. Living systems, for example, rely on an orchestra of molecular motors that consume chemical fuel to produce mechanical work. In this talk, I will describe two features of life, namely, time-irreversibility, and nonequilibrium self-assembly. Time irreversibility is the hallmark of nonequilibrium dissipative processes. Detecting dissipation is essential for our basic understanding of the underlying physical mechanism, however, it remains a challenge in the absence of observable directed motion, flows, or fluxes. Additional difficulty arises in complex systems where many internal degrees of freedom are inaccessible to an external observer. I will introduce a novel approach to detect time irreversibility and estimate the entropy production from time-series measurements, even in the absence of observable currents. This method can be implemented in scenarios where only partial information is available and thus provides a new tool for studying nonequilibrium phenomena. Further, I will explore the added benefits achieved by nonequilibrium driving for self-assembly, identify distinctive collective phenomena that emerge in a nonequilibrium self-assembly setting, and demonstrate the interplay between the assembly speed, kinetic stability, and relative population of dynamical attractors.

Diverse physical processes played important roles in the origin of life. I will review the origin of molecular homochirality, the growth of protocell membranes, and potential roles for liquid-liquid phase separation. I will then discuss the concept of functional information and its quantitative relationship with molecular function.

I will offer a broad-brush account of what explains the emergence of agents from a physics perspective, what sorts of conditions have to be in place for them to arise, and the essential features of agents when they are viewed through the lenses of physics. One implication will be a tight link to informational asymmetries associated with the thermodynamic gradient. Another will be a reversal of the direction of explanation from the one that is usually assumed in physical discussions. In in an evolved system, while it is true in some sense that the macroscopic behavior is the way it is because of the low-level dynamics, there is another sense in which the low-level dynamics is the way that it is because of the high-level behavior it supports. (More precisely and accurately, the constraints on the configuration of its components that define system as the kind of system it is are the way they are to exploit the low-level dynamics to produce the emergent behavior.) Another will be some insight into what might make human agency special.

Active particles which are self-propelled by converting energy into mechanical motion represent an expanding research realm in physics and chemistry. For micron-sized particles moving in a liquid (``microswimmers''), most of the basic features have been described by using the model of overdamped active Brownian motion [1]. However, for macroscopic particles or microparticles moving in a gas, inertial effects become relevant such that the dynamics is underdamped. Therefore, recently, active particles with inertia have been described by extending the active Brownian motion model to active Langevin dynamics which include inertia [2]. In this talk, recent developments of active particles with inertia (``microflyers'', ``hoppers'' or ``runners'') are summarized including: inertial delay effects between particle velocity and self-propulsion direction [3], tuning of the long-time self-diffusion by the moment of inertia [3], the influence of inertia on motility-induced phase separation and the cluster growth exponent [4], and the formation of active micelles (“rotelles”) by using inertial active surfactants. References [1] C. Bechinger, R. di Leonardo, H. Löwen, C. Reichhardt, G. Volpe, G. Volpe, Reviews of Modern Physics 88, 045006 (2016). [2] H. Löwen, Journal of Chemical Physics 152, 040901 (2020). [3] C. Scholz, S. Jahanshahi, A. Ldov, H. Löwen, Nature Communications 9, 5156 (2018). [4] S. Mandal, B. Liebchen, H. Löwen, Physical Review Letters 123, 228001 (2019). [5] C. Scholz, A. Ldov, T. Pöschel, M. Engel, H. Löwen, Surfactants and rotelles in active chiral fluids, will be published

It is sometimes said that there are two reasons why physics is so successful as a science. One is that it deals with very simple problems. The other is that it attempts to account only for universal aspects of systems at a desired level of description, with lower level phenomena subsumed into a small number of adjustable parameters. It is a widespread belief that this approach seems unlikely to be useful in biology, which is intimidatingly complex, where “everything has an exception”, and where there are a huge number of undetermined parameters. I will try to argue, nonetheless, that there are important, experimentally-testable aspects of biology that exhibit universality, and should be amenable to being tackled from a physics perspective. My suggestion is that this can lead to useful new insights into the existence and universal characteristics of living systems. I will try to justify this point of view by contrasting the goals and practices of the field of condensed matter physics with materials science, and then by extension, the goals and practices of the newly emerging field of “Physics of Living Systems” with biology. Specific biological examples that I will discuss include the following: Universal patterns of gene expression in cell biology Universal scaling laws in ecosystems, including the species-area law, Kleiber’s law, Paradox of the Plankton Universality of the genetic code Universality of thermodynamic utilization in microbial communities Universal scaling laws in the tree of life The question of what can be learned from studying universal phenomena in biology will also be discussed. Universal phenomena, by their very nature, shed little light on detailed microscopic levels of description. Yet there is no point in seeking idiosyncratic mechanistic explanations for phenomena whose explanation is found in rather general principles, such as the central limit theorem, that every microscopic mechanism is constrained to obey. Thus, physical perspectives may be better suited to answering certain questions such as universality than traditional biological perspectives. Concomitantly, it must be recognized that the identification and understanding of universal phenomena may not be a good answer to questions that have traditionally occupied biological scientists. Lastly, I plan to talk about what is perhaps the central question of universality in biology: why does the phenomenon of life occur at all? Is it an inevitable consequence of the laws of physics or some special geochemical accident? What methodology could even begin to answer this question? I will try to explain why traditional approaches to biology do not aim to answer this question, by comparing with our understanding of superconductivity as a physical phenomenon, and with the theory of universal computation. References Nigel Goldenfeld, Tommaso Biancalani, Farshid Jafarpour. Universal biology and the statistical mechanics of early life. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 375, 20160341 (14 pages) (2017). Nigel Goldenfeld and Carl R. Woese. Life is Physics: evolution as a collective phenomenon far from equilibrium. Ann. Rev. Cond. Matt. Phys. 2, 375-399 (2011).

Over the past five years, our understanding of how mechanical processes act across multiple scales to direct morphogenesis has advanced significantly. Yet, there remain numerous open questions, including the role of mechanics in tissue shaping, cancer dissemination, and cellular aging. The From Molecules to Organs:The Mechanobiology of Morphogenesis conference will bring together world leaders in the fields of mechanobiology and morphogenesis. The three-day conference will span scales, from single molecules up to whole organisms.

When was the last time you ran into a giant? Chances are never. Almost 100 years ago, JBS Haldane posed an outwardly simple yet complex question – what is the most optimal size (for a biological system)? The living world around us contains a huge diversity of organisms, each with its own characteristic size. Even the size of subcellular organelles is tightly controlled. In absence of physical rulers, how do cells and organisms truly “know” how large is large enough? What are the mechanisms in place to enforce size control? Many of these questions have motivated generations of scientists to look for physical principles underlying size control in biological systems. In the next edition of Emory's Theory and Modeling of Living Systems (TMLS) workshop series, our panel of speakers will take a close look at these questions, across the entire scale - from the molecular, all the way to the ecosystem.

Over the past five years, our understanding of how mechanical processes act across multiple scales to direct morphogenesis has advanced significantly. Yet, there remain numerous open questions, including the role of mechanics in tissue shaping, cancer dissemination, and cellular aging. The From Molecules to Organs:The Mechanobiology of Morphogenesis conference will bring together world leaders in the fields of mechanobiology and morphogenesis. The three-day conference will span scales, from single molecules up to whole organisms.

Many of us came to biology from physics. There we have been trained on such classic examples as muon g-2, where experimental data and theoretical predictions agree to many significant digits. Now, working in biology, we routinely hear that it is messy, most details matter, and that the best hope for theory in biology is to be semi-qualitative, predict general trends, and to forgo the hope of ever making quantitative predictions with the precision that we are used to in physics. Colloquially, we should be satisfied even if data and models differ so much that plotting them on the same plot makes little sense. However, some of us won’t be satisfied by this. So can we take theory in biology seriously and predict experimental outcomes within (small) error bars? Certainly, we won’t be able to predict everything, but this is never required, even in traditional physics. But we should be able to choose some features of data that are nontrivial and interesting, and focus on them. We also should be able to find different classes of models --- maybe even null models --- that match biology better, and thus allow for a better agreement. It is even possible that large-dimensional datasets of modern high-throughput experiments, and the ensuing “more is different” statistical physics style models will make quantitative, precise theory easier. To explore the role of quantitative theory in biology, in this workshop, eight speakers will address some of the following general questions based on their specific work in different corners of biology: Which features of biological data are predictable? Which types of models are best suited to making quantitative predictions in different fields? Should theorists interested in quantitative predictions focus on different questions, not typically asked by biologists? Do large, multidimensional datasets make theories (and which theories?) more or less likely to succeed? This will be an unapologetically theoretical physics workshop — we won’t focus on a specific subfield of biology, but will explore these questions across the fields, hoping that the underlying theoretical frameworks will help us find the missing connections.