It seems Einstein's equivalence principle is neglecting time dilation. If an observer is at rest in an inertial reference frame, free of any gravitation, she will experience time flow at the &quot;native&quot; rate of a universe empty of mass and energy. However, an observer in free fall at the surface of the earth will experience time flow at a rate determined by earth's gravitation, which is slower than the native time flow rate. This seems to imply non-equivalence?
A clock near the surface of the earth will run slower than one on the top of the mountain.  If the equivalence principal tells us that being at rest in a gravitational field is equivalent to being in an accelerated frame of reference in free space, shouldn't the clock near the earth run increasingly slower than the other clock over time?  If those two clocks are considered to be in two different frames of acceleration, the one near the earth will have a greater acceleration than the one on the mountain, and thus over time, their relative velocity will increase over time which will increase the time dilation.  Or is this not a proper use of the equivalence principle?
Someone has asked for answer to these topics. However, I still want someone to provide me with simple and universal answers. I recently read a sentence from the English-speaking person. It is in an article. It is, ' The available options for mitigating pad cratering are not universally effective (see link below), but they may be helpful on a case by case basis until more crack resistant laminates are developed and become available.  '  If I am to write this, I will use 'a case-by-case basis until more crack-resistant laminates'   Can anyone tell me when to use a hyphen to coin a new word? I'm using ubuntu 14.04 LTS. When I start my pc and click on any bookmark from the file manager it shows this error:   Unable to find the requested file. Please check the spelling and try again. Unhandled error message: Error when getting information for file '/media/angel/DOC/edu': No such file or directory   But when I open DOC drive and again clink on the same bookmark it works properly. Can anybody tell me why is this happening and how to solve this issue?   Edit: Output of lsblk is following: (ubuntu is installed in sda5)  NAME   MAJ:MIN RM   SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT sda      8:0    0 119.2G  0 disk  ├─sda1   8:1    0  91.3G  0 part  ├─sda2   8:2    0     1K  0 part  ├─sda5   8:5    0  24.1G  0 part / └─sda6   8:6    0   3.8G  0 part [SWAP] sdb      8:16   0 465.8G  0 disk  ├─sdb1   8:17   0  93.2G  0 part  ├─sdb2   8:18   0     1K  0 part  ├─sdb5   8:21   0  93.2G  0 part  ├─sdb6   8:22   0  89.3G  0 part  ├─sdb7   8:23   0  93.2G  0 part  ├─sdb8   8:24   0  93.2G  0 part  └─sdb9   8:25   0   3.8G  0 part  sr0     11:0    1  1024M  0 rom     After opening the disk drive the output of lsblk is bellow:   NAME   MAJ:MIN RM   SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT sda      8:0    0 119.2G  0 disk  ├─sda1   8:1    0  91.3G  0 part  ├─sda2   8:2    0     1K  0 part  ├─sda5   8:5    0  24.1G  0 part / └─sda6   8:6    0   3.8G  0 part [SWAP] sdb      8:16   0 465.8G  0 disk  ├─sdb1   8:17   0  93.2G  0 part  ├─sdb2   8:18   0     1K  0 part  ├─sdb5   8:21   0  93.2G  0 part  ├─sdb6   8:22   0  89.3G  0 part /media/angel/DOC ├─sdb7   8:23   0  93.2G  0 part  ├─sdb8   8:24   0  93.2G  0 part  └─sdb9   8:25   0   3.8G  0 part  sr0     11:0    1  1024M  0 rom   The output of sudo blkid gives the following information about sdb6:  /dev/sdb6: LABEL="DOC" UUID="04280A22280A12FA" TYPE="ntfs" Why can't energy be created or destroyed? shortcut for commands Is there a way to get the count of rows in all tables in a MySQL database without running a SELECT count() on each table? How do you delete untracked local files from your current working tree? What exactly is a hat?  I have seen a lot of people arguing the significance of hats and the limited edition hats. I know the hats are sort of linked to the Winterbash stuff, but what exactly is a hat, what does it do, how do I get one?  Is there a full list of hats? When you review papers submitted for publication, is there an “optimal” length for reviews? In my experience as an author and referee, I have seen a large range of review lengths (for reference, a paper in my field is typically between 3 and 8 printed pages):   Zero length: for some of the papers I have authored, the reviewer just clicked the “accept as is” or “reject” checkmark on the review sheet, without adding any comment (at least, not any comment visible to me). It's not so common, but it has happened. Short length: a lot of time, I received reviews who consisted of a single paragraph. Medium: one full page, maybe two pages.   Although I have never received any such long reviews, I have myself written on a few occasions reviews that exceed two pages, including once or twice a four or five-page review.  These were cases where the paper was good, but could be (in my view) much improved and some of the aspects/consequences had escaped the authors' consideration.  I am wondering how useful reviews of various length are to editors. I often consider that “unmotivated” reviews are useless, as they do not give any real insight about the paper to the editor. For example, if the editor gets two conflicting non motivated reviews, how is she to decide?  On the other hand, although I write some from time to time, I have never received long reviews, so… is this something frowned upon? Removing Ubuntu from UEFI Bios Menu Unable to locate package The problem with reputation: does high reputation attract too many upvotes? It's not that I feel bitter when somebody else's answer is upvoted above my own, but it's when a user with a high rep answers a question and their answer seems to attract an immediate barrage of upvotes.  Now I'm not saying that these votes are always unwarranted, but by simply observing this behavior, I think the system seems flawed.    The concept of reputation (or at least one of the concepts) is to give users a sense of trust in the reputed user's answers.  But this should be trust, not blind faith.  I know that this problem doesn't exist for every question asked on SO, but it's definitely present.  I'm sure this is a contentious question, as it might seem overly critical, but does anybody else agree with me and, if so, does anybody have any thoughts on how this problem could be alleviated? It's a great shame when a new or less active user's answer is stifled by the reputation-rich user's answer. English idiom for 'bad consequences stemming from too much ambition' I'm looking for an idiom that is equivalent to the Portuguese:  Quem tudo quer, tudo perde. Who wants everything, loses everything.  It basically points out that being too ambitious will have bad consequences: not only does one not get what one's striving for, but one also ends up losing what one already had (and probably took for granted). This idiom should be usable in everyday speech. There are two Java Web Start tags:  : x 239 : x 320   Both tags refer to the same technology  refers to  both wiki point to  all questions tagged with  clearly relate to Java Web Start   I suggest they be merged into  (which appears in the auto-complete list if one types "webstart" in the Tags box when asking a new question). Can I mention professors' names in the statement of purpose? For PhD applications, I have mentioned that I am interested in some research areas. Besides, I am thinking about mentioning some professors' names, so that it shows I have read their websites and I am not just sending out generic statements applicable to many schools.  But is it good to mention some professors' names in the statement of purpose, if I don't know them personally? In what cases is it good, and in what cases it isn't?  For example, is it good to only mention    those whose research directions are aligned with my research interests, or/and those whose books or notes I have heard of, or better, might have read some parts of, or/and those who are already established and famous (such as having certain titles), or/and those that are directing the PhD graduate programs, or/and those that are heads of the departments?    What will other professors who are not mentioned think? How will you do, if it were you? How to solve apt "package cannot be configured because package is in a different version" errors? How do you switch from Wayland back to Xorg in Ubuntu 17.10? Some of my applications don't work on Ubuntu 17.10 Wayland. How can I switch back to Xorg? Does removing an iPhone from my icloud account also erase the data? how to change landscape mode Redirect to SSL only if browser supports SNI Proving the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality by induction I ran across this problem in some old notes, and I frustratingly can't figure out how to do it   Let $a_i$ and $b_i$ be sequences of natural numbers, use induction to show  $\sum_{i=1}^n (a_ib_i)^{1/2} \le (\sum_{i=1}^n a_i)^{1/2}(\sum_{i=1}^n b_i)^{1/2} $  Obviously this is trivial to show for n=1. I can't make much progress on n+1. I've tried various tactics, squaring both sides etc.   Any hint or help would be appreciated. Thanks.