how technical is Einstein's book on relativity?

oriel36 wrote:
Alan Dillard wrote:
Looking for opinions from anyone who has read The Meaning of Relativity. I
collect books in fine bindings for my home library and found a very nice
copy of The Meaning of Relativity on eBay below, but was wondering if a
non-scientist would find it interesting. Or is it a bit too technical? If
it's an interesting read, I think I'll bid on it.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=170057950676

There is nothing technical about the exotic 1905 concept,it amounts to
being an expansion or rather the conclusion of Newton's celestial
sphere concepts while basing it on the 1898 fictional novel by H.G.
Wells ,the sci-fi classic -'The Time Machine' -

"Really this is what is meant by the Fourth Dimension, though some
people who talk about the Fourth Dimension do not know they mean it. It
is only another way of looking at Time. There is no difference between
time and any of the three dimensions of space except that our
consciousness moves along it. But some foolish people have got hold of
the wrong side of that idea. "

http://www.bartleby.com/1000/1.html

You only have to remember that the excerpt above could be found in any
science fiction section of a bookstore in 1898 while Albert's version
appeared half a decade later.I like relativity because it finally
brought to the surface the celestial sphere core lurking at the center
of Newton's work,if you want to know what this means graphically,let me
show you whgere they are getting 'warped space' -

http://www.opencourse.info/astronomy...phere_anim.gif

'Understanding' relativity is a poisoned chalice,just go to
sci.physics.relativity to see what happens to people when they get
caught up in wordplays by using the celestial arena as a backdrop.

And @ 65,000 Kperrrrrhowmanyvectorswasthatagain.. here is another
insight:
http://hometown.aol.com/astroequation/mathone.htm