When a zombie bites a person, they become a zombie.

According to Newton’s Third Law, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Logically (and legally), therefore, if the action of a zombie makes a person into a zombie, then the opposite reaction must be that a person biting a zombie will make that zombie into a person.

One can argue however, that Newton’s Third Law is not about this at all, making this a tenuous, if not entirely false statement. This is deeply concerning, as biting zombies is the fastest, quickest, and most morally sound way to stop an undead apocalypse. If we were in fact not able to use this deeply fundamental strategy, perhaps global society would collapse, and we’d have to live out whatever scant existences in the burning husks of failed modernity, rationing off whatever remnant shards of life that remain, until the semblances of stability not only buckle under incomprehensible weights but simply collapse, and human civilization simply ends.

Luckily however, we have several key pieces of evidence that can prove that biting a zombie must, legally, turn that zombie into a person.

Firstly, we must tangle with the core criticism about Newton’s Third Law, and more specifically that it entails only the exertion of force, such that if you exert force on an object, the opposite force will interact with the object as well. If someone were to push an object, which is the exertion of force, that object would then move in the direction it is pushed, which is the opposite reaction, and which will occur in exact equal measure to the action taken; the object pushed will not go any further than the amount of energy the pusher put into their push. The distinction made by this critique is that scientific realities are not the same as lived experiences, and that actions and reactions that exist in any realm except for purely scientific discussions on action and reaction, do not share this same paradigm.

Perhaps nowadays, this is simple, given the clear distinction of physics, which is the study of matter, and therefore all things that exist, and metaphysics, which deals with abstract existences beyond the natural world. Through this, Newton’s Law only applies to physics, and nothing else.

But Newton would not have seen it this way. Newton, in fact, was deeply convinced that the physical world related itself irrevocably to metaphysical constructs. To him, the universe was sane, logical, and mathematically constructed, but also inherently tied to supernatural causes. God, in the mind of Newton, was the supreme being who formulated the logics of the universe, while also retaining enough vitality to not simply have created a vast interlocking automaton.

If Newton could not distinguish the applicable nature between science and the supernatural, and instead saw them as the same unified whole that defined the universe (while also disproving a great deal of superstition, arguing for a more critical view of the natural world), then there is nothing to say that his Third Law does not also apply metaphysically, and can thereby also encapsulate state changes beyond simple force exertions. The fundamental forces that govern identity and being, for instance, would fall under the Third Law as well, and as the defining qualities of zombieness and personhood are integrated elements within them, these would also be legally bound to the tenets of the Third Law.

Beyond this, Newton staunchly believed in the existence of alchemy, and certainly believed in the field’s core tenets, that substances could be changed, evolved, and adapted, through precise purification techniques, thereby altering them into new substances. In fact, it is likely for a time that Newton had the largest alchemical library in Britain.

The implication of alchemy is effectively that all substances can be altered, although perfected states can be obtained, and that these states are manifested by precise physical elements. It is the task of the alchemist to perfect the less refined substances to form greater elements; one example is turning lead into gold. We can apply this to the zombie/human situation as well. Zombies are generally depicted as slowly decaying, rotten husks with no sense of being, no purpose, and no chance of personal or social betterment. A person, meanwhile, is capable of intense change, is vibrant, and full of life. A person can find and create meaning and value, thereby finding vast purpose not only for themselves but the world around them In turn, one could argue, that the zombie represents all base, animalistic desires of a person, and therefore the zombie is a less refined substance that can, through alchemical interactions, be refined into a person. Given Newton’s connection to the field, there is no way to truly say that he did not intend the Third Law to be viewed along these lines, nor that the Third Law itself could not utilize alchemical baselines to enforce itself on reality as a whole.

One could make the argument however, that alchemy is deeply unscientific, and therefore cannot be included as evidence in a discussion about the universal nature of scientific laws.

It is true that alchemy is deeply unscientific, and yet also highly scientific at the same time. Elements do undergo regular state changes, from solid to liquid to gas, and occasionally plasma (if there is some step beyond plasma, we don’t currently know). Elements don’t just regularly convert from one element to another,so lead does not just become gold, even if you want it to really hard. And yet, using precision tools, atoms can be split (quite destructively), and in particle accelerators, elements can be broken up and reformatted to make new elements, and elements that would be too unstable to exist in reality can be formed, if only for the few scant seconds before they dissipate. So, while there are no Philosophers Stones or Elixirs of Immortality, some of the underlying proto-science that informs alchemy does in fact properly operate though scientific lenses, and therefore this consideration as a whole is still relevant.

So while we have shored up our key defenses on this side, there is of course the other side to also consider; that of the zombie.

Likely, the newly undead, torn from whatever it is that lies after (if anything at all), will care very little about the life and views of Isaac Newton. As such, without an appreciation for the Newton’s Third Law, it is unlikely that they will change back into being human. There are of course several key steps to prevent this.

Firstly, one must begin by establishing with the zombies a philosophical baseline via Kant. Here, the two sides will be able to come to an agreement that it is not legally possible to commit crimes, and that in fact breaking laws is illegal.

After this, instead of requiring the antsy zombie to read all of Newton’s writings, a single biography should suffice, while a more visual option, such as a movie (of which there are many), can act as a replacement if needed.

After these simple tasks, broaching the concept of the Third Law will be easy, and the zombie apocalypse averted entirely.