Recent content by Mike_bb

I saw such interpretation: Proper acceleration does not deviate from a geodesic—it is, in itself, a physical indicator that a body has deviated from its natural geodesic motion. Is this true?

Yes.

Ok. If I need to, I will do it.

See comment #44.

Dale explained what's wrong in my calculations. His explanation is the best solution.

We have big stone at rest in Frame X and moving train (Frame X'). These frames are moving relative to each other. Could you provide example?

I've mentioned it above. See comment #74.

We can conduct experiments in the trains. Fictitious forces will emerge in moving non-inertial frame.

Non-inertial frame solve this problem, but I've never heard how to differ which inertial frame move relative to another.

The state of rest depends entirely on your choice. If two inertial reference frames (IRFs) are moving relative to each other at a constant velocity (for example, a train platform and a passing train), you can: • Define the platform as being at rest, in which case the train is in motion. • Define...

Ok. It's impossible to say which of frames is at rest relative to another. This is principle of relativity.

Frame F is "at rest" relative to frame F'. Frame F' is moving relative to frame F.

Frame F is the rest frame but frame F' is moving frame.

My previous comment is wrong. Each frame is associated with 2 clocks (in our example).