I understand the concept that all motion is relative and that if a body were moving away from another body, then each body is moving relative to the other and both could experiencing the same conditions relative to the other. HOwever whatif there were two bodies that were not moving relative to eachother, and suddenly one were accelerated away from the other.
wouldnt the accelerated body feel this acceleration and not the other, and wouldnt this be a measurable distinction between the two.

Yes. That's why the twin paradox isn't.

>> wouldnt this be a measurable distinction between the two.

There are two types of motion, one inertial and the other not inertial.

All motion that is inertial is inter-dependant so in a way it is the same motion. Non inertial motion attracts inertia so there is always a distinction in the so called 'relative motion' that the example highlights.

This is not a consequence of any so called 'paradox in relativity' but a consequence of differential interlacing of inertial spin fields.

Julixa,

You are right. There are measurable differences between accelerated and non-accelerated points of view.

Oh, and ignore Zarkov. There's no such thing as a "spin field".

James R
why points of view? If an accelerometer were mounted on the accelerated body wouldnt it be measurable even if a an electromagnetic signal were indicating this acceleration. .

Yes, that's what James is saying.

If your point of view is accelerating (a non-inertial reference frame), then you can detect that fact.

>> Oh, and ignore Zarkov. There's no such thing as a "spin field".

follow ignorance and you are always happy, James R.

better chack that ref to an atomic battery,,, you will see some similarities to spin fields!!

ERRROR that should be atomic switch

I prefer not to be happy than to follow you, Zarkov.