Anatoly Logunov has set out a relativistic theory of gravity that is not the same as the orthodoxy of the “general theory of relativity”. What do we make of this?
Logunov, like Alfred North Whitehead, thinks that Minkowski geometry is fundamental to the theory of gravity. Logunov’s arguments are much more detailed and extensive than Whitehead’s, and of course take account of the Shapiro delay that had not been observed when Whitehead was writing.
There are those who think that the orthodoxy of the “general theory of relativity” takes into full account the physical implications of Minkowski geometry. On the other hand, Logunov thinks not.
I have written in another thread (https://scienceblog.com/cms/einsteins-time-dilation-and-length-contraction-real-15445.html#comment-29497)a proposal that a simple consideration, of the question of the “reality” or otherwise of “Einstein’s time dilation and length contraction” illustrated by the twin clock scenario, leads to thoughts about Minkowski geometry and the “general theory of relativity”. Perhaps if anyone replies to that proposal, here might be a place to do so.
Christopher
If our reporting has informed or inspired you, please consider making a donation. Every contribution, no matter the size, empowers us to continue delivering accurate, engaging, and trustworthy science and medical news. Independent journalism requires time, effort, and resources—your support ensures we can keep uncovering the stories that matter most to you.
Join us in making knowledge accessible and impactful. Thank you for standing with us!