Is Lorentz transformation absolute

[Chrisc]

No it isn't. It means "the first time derivative of the position the observer is 0 in the reference frame where the first time derivative of the position of the observer is 0". It is trivial, not meaningless.

This is a meaningful statement because you have made use of two frames.
Your statement is a statement of "rest" when the first time derivative of position is 0, or it is motion when the first time derivative is >0.
It would not have been a meaningful statement if you had only made use of one frame.
This is more clear when you make the time derivative of position >0.
The first time derivative of position of the observer is 2 with respect to the observer.
In this case you are stating the observer is in motion with respect to himself.
This is meaningless or nonsensical.

 

[Doc Al]

Enough, already. This thread is done.