A couple of days ago, I posted a tweet suggesting that the most basic constituents of reality may not be fixed unchanging bits of stuff but sequences of actions, events. (It was more concise when I tweeted it.)
Bryan Johnson wrote to say explicitly what I vaguely knew: “your description of fundamental reality describes elementary particles quite well. The lifetime of an elementary particle is a miniscule fraction of a second; its detection in an experiment can be viewed simply as an event, and is often referred to as that by scientists. After it has left a track in a cloud chamber, a particle simply doesn’t exist anymore. In addition, a fundamental property of elementary particles is a quantity referred to by scientists as action. The action of a particle is its energy divided by its frequency, and thus it reflects the wave (or undulatory, as some of the older quantum physicists called it) nature of matter. It’s really more accurate to think of elementary particles as oscillations, musical notes if you will, rather than billiard balls.”
Peter Leithart
Peter J. Leithart is President of Theopolis Institute. He is the author of numerous books on theology, literature, and culture, including Theopolitan, Defending Constantine, and Baptized Body.
More from Science
Continue reading related articles

Corruption of Science
The world’s most interesting man, Matthew B. Crawford, offers a brilliant and chilling diagnosis of “How Science Has Been Corrupted” at UnHerd . The hinge of his analysis is the “dissonance between our idealised image of science, on the one hand, and the work ‘science’ is called to do in…

Evolution 2.0
Perry Marshall’s Evolution 2.0 is a devastating critique of Evolution 1.0, the neo-Darwinian theory Marshall summarizes in the equation, “Random mutation + natural selection + time = Evolution.” His critique focuses primarily on the “random mutation” factor. Scientists have experimented on fruit flies for decades. By causing mutations through radiation,…

Clapping Trees
Do trees clap their hands at the coming of the Lord? (Isaiah 55:2). Do they really ? We instinctively think not, and quickly classify such passages as literary personifications or anthropomorphic metaphors. Perhaps, writes Mark Harris in an essay in Knowing Creation , we’re too hasty. What’s the alternative? One,…
In Medias Res
Your weekly digest for all things Theopolis.