Originally Posted by **MikeFontenot** It's not necessary to use general relativity for accelerating observers. In fact, doing it in GR is a very contorted and artificial way to do it.
By far the easiest and least error-prone way to do it is explained here: https://sites.google.com/site/cadoeq...eference-frame
and here:
"Accelerated Observers in Special Relativity", PHYSICS ESSAYS, December 1999, p629. |

I strongly disagree.

*By definition*, physics in an accelerated frame

*is* general relativity. It's simply a matter of definition. In order to determine the rate of clocks in an accelerated observers frame their position must be used and that position determines the gravitational potential which effects the rates of clocks. Recall the equivalence principle: A uniformly accelerating frame of reference is equivalent to a uniform gravitational field.

If you read Einstein's 1911 derivation of gravitational time dilation you'll see that he uses what appears to be special relativity. But in reality its a step to GR which in fact is what relativity of accelerated frames is called.

Also, if you read Peacocks text on cosmology (i.e. the text used at MIT) you'll see the author explain the twin paradox from the accelerated observers FOR using GR.

So while one

*need not* be required to use GR to analyze this it most certainly

*can be* used. And in fact it is being used

*by definition* when one is using accelerated frames.

Otherwise I'm curious to hear what you think GR is?