You are here

1. Summary of the book "Matter, Space, Time, Gravitation"

Summary of the book "Matter, Space, Time, Gravitation"


From the ancient Greeks and Romans, from Epicurus, Democritus, Aristotle, Titus Lucretius Carus to the age of Renaissance, Leonardo da Vinci and Descartes the scientific world was perfectly fine explaining all phenomena with the movement of substance (movement of matter). Pressure, torrents and strikes of microparticles of substance and their interaction contained in the definition of ‘a moving atom’ played the main role in explanation of all natural phenomena of the powerful atomistic school. Here is what the great Epicurus said using Lucretius’ words regarding the interaction of  eternally moving atoms of matter which:

Suffer constant strikes from endless times and are also spurred to move by their own weight, they move eternally while combining in any possible way and experiencing everything there is to experience from what they can create from their collisions. It happens so that in their eternal journey they pass all kinds of types, combinations and movements they coincide so that their sum often forms the beginning of great things – the sea, the earth, the skies and the tribes of living creatures.


Newtonhave a precise, short and clear definition of space and time.

«First of all,Newtondistinguishes the absolute and the relative time, space and movement. According toNewton, absolute space and time exists independently of all things, not relatively to anything. Absolute time, or continuity, always flows evenly, absolute space is always homogenous and static. Neither absolute time nor absolute space are available to our senses. Their relative counterparts are, they are but measures of the absolute.

Absolute time is a measure of continuity used in mundane life instead of true mathematical time (i.e. absolute time), it is measured in hours, days, months, years.

Relative space is a finite moving part of absolute space, its measure available to our senses through studying of its location relatively to certain bodies and which ‘in mundane life is taken for static space. For example, the length of air bodies located below or above ground level is determined by their location relatively to the earth.»

B.I. Spasski, ‘History of physics’, t. 1, p. 137, 1977


«…the relativity theory radically changed scientific view on space and time. First of all, it tied space and time which were understood separately, secondly, it put their properties in dependence on substance and field»

A.I. Panchenko, ‘Philosophy, physics, microworld’. P.106, 1988


Lenin deepened the materialistic view on space and time proving that they are as real as  matter filling the space with its eternal movement.

«There is nothing in the world except moving matter, and this moving matter can move in no other way than through space and in time.».

(V.I. Lenin, same book, p. 158)

The books «MATTER, SPACE, TIME, GRAVITATION» and «IS EINSTEIN RIGHT?» and the site show that matter and material interaction happen in space and time but are not tied with space or time. Furthermore, space and time are not tied to each other.

Following the path of true materialists of all the foreword, Lenin used his unrelenting logic to defend the statement that space and time cannot be equal to the definition of matter, although they are objectively real in the same way as matter moving in them. Agreeing with these concepts, we have every right to claim that space and time cannot be included in the definition of matter as modern physics do.

«Materialism inevitably has to accept the objective reality of time and space since it accepts the existence of objective reality, i.e. moving matter, which is independent from our consciousness…».

Same book and page

Using Lenin’s view as basis, we find that his opinion is astoundingly correlating with that of Engels which is expressed in the book ‘Dialectics of nature’. To discredit the tendency of modern scientists and philosophers to  spread the abstract matter over space and time, we will provide the following statement Engels made in his book: 

 «This is old, firstly abstractions are created away from sensual things, then the desire for sensual cognition arises. They want to see time and hug space. Empiricists get so absorbed in their comfortable empirical cognition that they imagine themselves operating inside sensual cognition even when dealing with abstractions. We know what an hour is, what space and time are! As if time is something other than the sum of all clocks and space is something else than the sum of cubic metres! Of course, both these forms of existence of matter are nothing without it, they become empty images, abstractions existing only in our heads.»

F. Engels, ‘Dialectics of Nature’, p. 187

There are periods in the history of physics when the accumulated experimental material is not fully explained  by existing theories. This is when scientists are unable to explain newly discovered phenomena and create abstract views far from reality. Virtual properties of matter are created (quarks, fields of all sorts, gravitational waves etc.) which supposedly explain the new facts. Science drifts away from reality and lulls scientists into the depths of fictional theories which have nothing in common with reality. This is when abstract mathematical illusory works start to dominate. They seemingly explain the new problems in physics.

This is a natural way of cognition. Firstly information is accumulated, research is carried out, first comprehension is formulated. The first systematization of accumulated material occurs. Physics as a science encompass many fields of scientific research like the study of electrical and magnetic, heat and light, gravitational and many other natural processes. In the initial phase of research when every sphere develops independently it is impossible to find common ground which ties the processes together. Same processes and phenomena occurring differently in different spheres are given different names, definitions and explanations. For example, if we look at the spheres of electrical and light phenomena study, we can quote Lomonosov who argued that light and electricity are spinning motions of the same particles of ether (field in the modern view). This is what Lenin talked about. Light and electricity are forms of movement of a single substance.

Which phenomena are explained by modern physics?

Electricity is the movement of electrons measured in amperes. Light beam is the movement of electrons measured in lumens. Further examples can be provided, since heat, magnetic, electromagnetic and many other natural phenomena are the movement of the same substance particles, the movement of matter. Researchers in these narrow directions will never find common grounds and will not want to. They have their own castes and communication.

This universal action of substance in different processes can be only seen by a scientist proficient in all spheres of science.  Examples of this are widely known, we can remember the extent of knowledge ofNewton, Lomonosov, Leonardo da Vinci. Such scientists are rare, they are milestones of the history of sciences. They accumulate knowledge gathered by humanity in its current stage of historical development and analyze, synthesize and systematize the fruits of all sciences. These scientists are not a random occurrence, they appear because there is necessity in such analysis when there is enough accumulated knowledge.

There have been many discoveries not fitting into existing theories by the start of the XX century. The Copernican system has replaced the Ptolemaic system, wave properties of light and microparticles have been discovered, electricity has been created. The absolute space of light has been determined and postulated. Many other discoveries have been made. The enormous information flow did not fit into scientific understanding and created chaos in the heads of physicists of the time.

It was a period of quantitative accumulation of experimental data which inevitably led to a qualitative leap. However, as long as there is not enough data for comprehension of the processes, scientific minds will not have a clear picture and strict theories ready. The flow of information, discord and chaos in scientific minds caused the false opinion that the laws of classical mechanics have fallen. Such periods make it possible for inadequate, false theories to appear. Various ether theories have been such theories. Today Einstein’s relativity theory and quantum mechanics are such theories. The mistake in Einstein’s theory lies in the fact that processes of the world are studied in coordinate systems moving relatively to each other.

The book «IS EINSTEIN RIGHT?» proves that all properties of processes received in coordinate systems moving relatively to each others are virtual, apparent, false and existent only in the imagination but not in reality.

The relativity theory is based on the study of properties of processes in coordinate systems, this is why conclusions of this theory contradict common sense and real processes in nature (different flow of time in moving coordinate systems, dependence of velocities, trajectories etc. on the coordinate systems).

The appearance of the relativity created confusion within scientific minds which spurred absurd search for causes and sources of time. This is what the philosopher G. P. Aksenov writes for the magazine ‘Issues of philosophy’:

«Thus, the relativity theory supposedly narrowed the way in which time depends on movement – through velocity. The greater the velocity, the slower the passage of time in the system relatively to another system moving with different velocity. Their comparison is tied with transformation through the speed of light which is the only absolute system. Despite the resulting stretching of seconds and narrowing of centimeters in the direction of movement which are somewhat unclear for common sense (although finiteness of speed does remedy this), the relativity theory in its philosophical basis was adequate to our perception of integrity of the world more than the previous theory.».

G. P. Aksenov, ‘On the cause of time’, magazine ‘Issues of philosophy’, page 44, issue 1, 1996.

People are just being deceived while trusting the scientists. If the scientists themselves claim that there is no common sense in definition of space and time, there is certainly no common sense. Conclusions from the relativity theory are introduced as something which is supposedly still unusual.

«The reality of time or its distinguishment as a specific property of only one of the processes of the world is still very unusual.»
Same article, page 47

From the relativity theory comes the conclusion that:

«Geometrical properties of space and time do not exist independently, but relatively to matter in space».
A. Kopf, ‘Basics of the relativity theory’, p. 9, Ukranian publisher in Kharkov, 1937

Think about these words: geometrical properties of space and time do not exist independently. These words are the starting point for confusion in minds. Materialistically thinking scientists understand that absolute space and time exist independently from matter and material processes happening in said space and time. There is no space without matter or matter without space.

Geometry of space is measured by cubic meters and kilometers. Time is measured by seconds, hours, minutes.

It is possible to distinguish relative space and time for study of processes and phenomena in the studied area of space, but clarity is required in this matter: relative space and time are parts of absolute space and time and serve as their measures. An example of a chosen relative space is the sphere which man inhabits on the Earth. It is possible to distinguish space taken by our Solar system and study processes inside it.

Space and time are objectively real just like discrete matter but they are both not feelable matter.

Let us continue quoting Einstein’s theory followers:

«The relativity theory created in 1905 calls speed C finite and comes to the conclusion that space and time are tied to each other not in the way believed to be true before the XX century. The flow of time changes after transition to a moving coordinate system. Lengths change, the definition of simultaneity changes.».

Y. B. Zeldovich, M. Y. Hlopov, p. 147, ‘The drama of ideas in the cognition of nature’, The Main Editorial of Physical and Mathematical Literature, 1988

«Relativistic space lacks transitive (not dependent on the coordinate system) relation of simultaneity between two events. This implies that the physical picture of the universe travelling in some absolute time like a ship in an endless ocean does not fit into the formal structure of the laws of the relativity».

A. I. Panchenko, p. 108, ‘Philosophy, physics, microworld’,AcademyofSciencesof theUSSR, 1988.

From this statement comes the conclusion that the relativity theory is primary and free of doubt. However, the pesky physical picture of the universe does not fit into it.

«The general relativity theory and its main idea of curvature of time-space are unshaken. This is the result of lengthy discussions unfinished even today. Since they are not finished, it would be more precise to say that this is the result apparent to the authors (and not only them)»

Same book, p. 160

The discussions are not over! This is because there is no proof of the theory. It exists in science only because the phenomenon of gravitation has to be explained somehow. The relativity theory and quantum mechanics are the veil used by physicists who try to make it into an impregnable citadel by claiming that their mathematical exercises are the solution to the problem. 

We can find the same train of thought existing only in imagination and having no connection to real process in T. P. Lalaev’s article:

« … Quoting the correct statement by A. A. Egorov, a number of conclusions from the relativity theory can be viewed as a proof of the concept that each material object creates its own space-time».

T. P. Lalaev, ‘On the mechanism of flow of time’, the ‘Issues of philosophy’ magazine, issue 1, p. 51, 1996

This is when we can start talking about the quantum of space and time, it’s trendy. Quantum of space, quantum of field sound scientific and are too hard for common folk to understand.

«Independently of the fact of discovery of quantum of space (and time), the concept of elementary length has rational meaning.».

Y. B. Zeldovich, M. Y. Hlopov, p. 118, ‘The drama of ideas in the cognition of nature’, The Main Editorial of Physical and Mathematical Literature, 1988 

Meters, millimeters, angstroms, hours, seconds are not enough. Let us search for elementary length and time. Modern physicists have forsaken common sense and real processes of the world and have started to invent nature.

«From the modern point of view the rational meaning of the concept of elementary length should be tied to the hierarchy of physical interaction. Each elementary length of interaction characterizes their specific qualitative properties, distinguishing the area of effectivity of one type of interaction from effectivity of other types».

 Y. B. Zeldovich, M. Y. Hlopov, p. 119, ‘The drama of ideas in the cognition of nature’, The Main Editorial of Physical and Mathematical Literature, 1988

All of this word mess is caused by the fact that the author has no idea what he is talking about. And this is not his fault, it is the common state of physicists. Enormous scale of researches and achievements of experimental physics, especially in the sphere of microworld, has created many problems for scientists. However, it is science’s job to explain things. But what does one do if he does not understand a thing but has to? He created the veneer of understanding of processes of the world.

Lenin’s words are modern even now:

«…In our time thoughts of ‘economic’ deletion of matter from philosophy are wrapped in far more cunning forms convoluted by ‘new’ terminology. This is done so naïve people think that this is the newest in philosophy».

The task of a modern physicist is to come up with something that…

But he really should just remember the words of Isaac Newton:

«Nature is simple and is not teeming with unneeded causes».

As well as the words of M. Lomonosov:

«Nature is very simple, everything contradicting this statement should be discarded».

Let us provide the conclusion of our leading physicists resulting form the relativity theory.

«But let us formulate the following question: what happened when the relativity theory arrived with its property of continuity of time and space? Turns out that nothing much happened. The common grounds of classical physics and the relativity theory is the fact that the topology of space and time forms within the same continuum in any case.».                                                                               

Y. B. Zeldovich, M. Y. Hlopov, p. 106-107, ‘The drama of ideas in the cognition of nature’, The Main Editorial of Physical and Mathematical Literature, 1988

This is how F. Engels finds the state of science:

«Of course, the material point of view just means understanding of nature as it is without any additions. This is why it was somewhat taken for granted by the Greek philosophers of old. However, more than two millennia of mainly idealistic views separate us and them. In this case even returning to evident things is harder than it looks. »

F. Engels, ‘Dialectics of nature’, p. 157

This is why we have the right to think that the space-time continuum of modern physics is just a mathematical abstraction, a rational technique used in quantitative variations of statistical physics for solving various practical problems. However, this continuum which treats space, time and matter as a single entity does not in any way represent reality.

The theory of creation treating the universe as an infinite association of eternally and endlessly moving absolute microparticles has to base itself on the principle that space and time are absolute and are just as objectively real as discrete matter eternally moving in space and time.

The book «MATTER, SPACE, TIME, GRAVITATION» gives a materialistic view on space and time.


«Matter is the sum of substances from which this definition has been extracted».

F. Engels, ‘Dialectics of nature’, p. 187, 1956

Matter is the sum of substances and substances consist of microparticles which can nowadays be disassembled into components: electrons, protons, neutrons etc. There are no fields of any kind. A body can only emit that which it consists of. However, space filled with moving with microparticles can be called a field. In that case it does not constitute a part of substance.


Widely known is the matter’s definition given by Lenin:

«Matter is the objective reality given to us by our sensations».


All objectively real world consists of absolute particles of matter eternally moving in space. The sum of all elementary particles of substance eternally and endlessly moving in space and time is encompassed by the abstract term which is matter. 


The fact that modern science accepts that matter can be in two states (being substance and light), that substance is regular matter and light, heat, beam energy is special matter is the act of materialization of an ideal since light is just the action of matter, not the matter itself. Matter is singular by definition and there can be no special matter of any kind. As the definition of forest implies a sum of trees, the definition of matter implies a sum of substances. There is no forest without trees and no matter without substance. It is known that Einstein claimed in his general relativity theory that all objectively real world ‘wholly consists of gravitational and electromagnetic fields’, that the substance of matter is ‘part of space where fields are very strong’.

«Can we not throw away the definition of substance and build pure field physics? That which influences out feelings in form of substance is in fact an enormous concentration of energy in a relatively tight space. We could view substance as areas in space where fields are very strong.»

A. Einstein and L. Infeld, ‘The evolution of physics’, p. 233, 194

And as a last step of this energy program substance is fully deleted from the list of physical terms:

«Our new physics would not have place for both fields and substance since the only reality would be fields.».

Same book, p. 234

Einstein claimed as early as 1905 that:

«The mass of a body is the measure of energy in it»

A. Einstein, ‘The principle of relativity’, p.178, 1955

However, in 1921 he was fully supporting energetism:

«The mass of a body should be treated as a blob of energy of the quantity».

He also states that:

«According to the relativity theory there is no distinctive difference between mass and energy. Energy has mass and mass is energy.».

A. Einstein and L. Infeld, ‘The evolution of physics’, p. 185, 1948

Matter itself is proclaimed a blob of energy. The following words at the end of the presentation of the special relativity theory point at this:

«The inert mass of a body is a measure of energy which is inside it. Mass is concentrated, condensed energy. Thus, matter and electromagnetic energy are identical».   

A. Einstein and L. Infeld, ‘The evolution of physics’, p. 90, 1948

For Einstein matter has disappeared. Turns out that we, our Earth and all the universe are neither substance nor matter. All of it is just canned energy.

Then what is energy?

Energy is the ability of a body to do action. Energy is a measure of action. Energy cannot and does not exist as a material substance independently from a material body. Energy has been introduced by man as a measure to estimate work done by a body. Energy is described by purely imaginary formulas..

«Indeed, energy is the ability to do action. It is a mechanical term which can be mechanically utilized, i.e. with the help of movement and the science of movement.».

V.I. Lenin, ‘Philosophical notebooks’, p. 353

Our scientists have a tricky answer to the question about what an electromagnetic wave is. It is very hard to accuse them of energetism support.

«Existing material world (moving matter) appears to us in two main forms, substance and light.» These are the words of S. I. Vavilov taken from his work ‘The eye and the sun’, p.41, 1950. He acknowledges the dualism of matter. Such dualism leads to sophistical tricks which make it very difficult to understand where the truth is and whether the truth itself is true.

 «Matter (or substance and light) simultaneously has the properties of waves and particles, but generally speaking it is not waves or particles, and not a mix of both.»

Same book, p.44

Then what really is matter? This is a logical question, but Vavilov concludes that there can be no answer:

«The riddle remains unsolved in the common meaning of the word and became even more difficult that it seemed in the times ofNewtonand Lomonosov».                   

Same book, p.49

However, such claims make physicists feel helpless in trying to prove their statements. This is what Vavilov wrote on the phenomenon of annihilation:

«Transformation of light into matter has been experimentally proven. An amazing site is before our eyes as it can be seen on the photograph. A light ray, a gamma-ray transforms into several light substance matters. Something reminding of a fairy-tale transformation of melody into a violin occurs. Science has nothing to explain this phenomenon except formal Dirac’s theory which is not enough because of its formality.».

Same book, p. 48

There can be no answer because modern physics are in a vicious cycle trying its best to materialize immaterial field while excluding discrete microparticles of matter from its theoretical apparatus.

The book «MATTER, SPACE, TIME, GRAVITATION» and the site provide a materialistic view on matter.


Hooke and Galley,Newton’s contemporaries, were on the side of universal gravitation, butNewtonwas far from believing that the phenomenon of gravitation was an integral property of material substance. In his classical work ‘Optics’ he stresses that the forces of gravitation he introduces are temporary and relative.

«… Here I do not distinguish how this attraction can occur. That which I call attraction can happen through impulse and some other ways unknown to me. I use this word here to   simply denote a certain force which makes bodies move to each other for whatever reason.».

P.S. Kudryavtsev, ‘The history of physics’, p.238, 1956  

«I commence presenting the movement of mutually attracted bodies by analyzing the centripetal forces as attraction. However, it might be better to call it pushing should we view this matter from a physical point of view.».

I. Newton, ‘Mathematical basis of natural philosophy’, 1951

«By attraction I mean any tendency of bodies to mutually attract… In this same sense I use the word ‘rush’ or ‘thrust’ while studying here not types of forces and their physical properties, but their quantity and mathematical ratios between them.».

I. Newtonin his hortative to the XI part of his ‘Basis’

This is what we read in ‘The history of physics’ by Kudryavtsev which makes it clear thatNewtonwas not able to solve the mystery of gravitation.

«To this day was I explaining celestial phenomena and tides based on the force of gravitation but I have not stated the reasons of the gravitation itself. I could not derive the cause from phenomena and I do not deal in hypotheses.».

P. S. Kudryavtsev, ‘The history of physics’, p. 252, tome 1, 1956

Newtonconsidered the action of distance to gravitation absurd and refused common sense to those who accepted gravitation to be true.  

«To accept that gravitation is an integral part of matter in such a matter that one body has to influence another at a distance through vacuum without any medium which would transfer action and force from one body to another is so absurd to me that I believe that no man capable of thinking about philosophical matters will fall for it.»

Same source.

In the section ‘Mechanics and astronomy’ Engels judges the term of gravitation which firmly rooted itself in science thanks toNewton’s followers and became tied toNewtonhimself.

«Newtonian gravitation and centripetal force are examples of metaphysical thought. The problem has not been solved but only formulated, and this is supposed to be the solution.».

F. Engels, ‘Dialectics of nature’, p. 218, 1952

He also gives a final verdict:

«Newtonian gravitation. The best that could be said about it is that it does not explain but gives a clear picture of the current state of planets».

It  is evident that Lomonosov studiedNewton’s real thoughts well and understood his point of view. He uses unrelenting logic to explain the eternal nature of movement of matter, and this thought is stressed more than a few times in his various works.

«The initial movement cannot have a beginning, it eternally exists».

Same book, p. 201

Lomonosov’s words uttered more than 300 years ago are still full of healthy materialism and are pure after all these years:

«Thus, since no pure gravitation can exist, the gravitation of observable bodies happens as a result of a push. Consequently, there is matter pushing them towards the center of the Earth».

M. Lomonosov, complete set of works, tome 2, page 186, 1950      

Then Lomonosov writes in his work ‘On imperceptible particles of bodies’:

«Every gravitation is still suspicious. The reality of movement caused by pushing is evident. Hence bodies are spurred to move by only pushing».

Same source, tome 1, page 187.

He clarifies this by saying:

«If a body B is approaching a static body A with no visible push, it is said that the body A attracts the body B»

Later he states:

«Real attraction occurs when no push can be assumed. It seems that body B is attracted by body A, but in reality it receives a push either from body A or another, imperceptible body».

Finally he comes to the conclusion:

«… Thus, pure attraction in bodies cannot cause any action or counter-action».

Only firm belief in righteousness of his materialistic views based on solid grounds let Lomonosov say the following with clear irony:

«Here we argue with men who have distinguished themselves in sciences, who treat the apparent force of gravitation as a phenomenon explaining other phenomena. We can yield to their view just like we can yield to astronomers who estimate daily motion of stars around the Earth to find their culmination, rises etc.»                                                                  

Same source, p. 191 

As we can see, Lomonosov claimed that there is no gravitation in nature and attraction of bodies is caused by pushing which is the same as the pressure of some ‘gravitating fluid’.

Let us turn to conclusions of the relativity theory regarding gravitation.

It is postulated in the general theory of relativity that gravitational effects are caused not by forceful interaction of bodies and fields in space-time, but by deformation of space-time itself. This deformation is tied, among others, with the existence of mass-energy.

«Another prediction made by the general relativity theory is that in an empty space curvature waves can spread, so called gravitational waves. These waves are quite similar to electromagnetic, they have the same spreading speed C, they carry energy and impulse. Gravitational fields cause movement of bodies lying in their path, but the real expected result is so small that it still cannot be seen.»

A.I. Panchenko, ‘Philosophy, physics, microworld’. P.155, 1988

«Thus, the present situation with gravitational waves is the same as with neutrino in 1932-1952. We can see effect dependent on emitted gravitational waves but cannot locate the waves themselves».

Same source

Let us quote the major physicist K.A. Putilov on the nature of gravitation:

«In that sense of the word a special environment state or special environmental proerties are meant. In physics they give understanding about a dynamic field… The dynamic field of gravity is called the gravitational field»

Here we are, again at the ‘regular field’ of gravitation which does not explain the problem of gravitation as we have seen. It only formulates the problem.

Would it not be more honest to just leave the question open like the great physicists and philosophers of old? LikeNewton, Lomonosov, Engels and others. They did not create an illusion of clarity and did not lead the minds of young scientists astray, away from the search for solution of the problem of gravitation.

The book «MATTER, SPACE, TIME, GRAVITATION» and the site give materialistic definitions of space, time, gravitation.

The book «IS EINSTEIN RIGHT?» and the site show that processes of interaction happen in space and time but are not tied neither with space nor time, and space and time are not tied to each other.

In 1919 г. A. Eddington reported curving of light near the Sun at the moment of full eclipse. This was supposed to be the proof of curvature of space proposed by the general relativity theory.
The book «IS EINSTEIN RIGHT?» proves that as a result of interaction with the gravitational field of a macrobody material objects including satellites, light flows etc. move along curved trajectories, but not as a result of curved space. Their trajectories are the result of interaction with the macrobody.

The virtual, imaginary, observable effect of broadening universe is described in the book «IS EINSTEIN RIGHT?». The book also describes the inner structure of black holes.