k, my terminology is lacking. I am talking about a reference frame that is moving relative to the observers reference frame at a constant velocity. Edit: that is faster relative to the observers reference frames constant velocity.

timey, am I reading it wrong or are you trying to say that there is a preferred reference frame within SR?

You seem to be saying that one of the reference frames is accelerated.

SR in not dealing with acceleration can not have a preferred frame. Both frames can rightfully say that they are at rest and it is the other one moving.

As I said SR is a teaching aid. If you want to refer to real world situations, then you are looking at a dynamic and changing Universe, not a still frame, and you have to use GR.

I have set out some thought experiments in posts 185, 187, and 196 that clearly show my line of questioning. I have used the wrong terminology in describing the reference frame as accelerated. What I mean is that the observer is observing a reference frame that is moving at a constant velocity that is faster relative to his own.

In this instance the reference frame that is moving faster relative to the observers frame will be experiencing a slowing of its time relative to the observers frame due to its greater velocity. This is correct right?

The reference frame that is moving faster relative to the observers reference frame will experience a contracting of its experience of distance relative to the observers reference frame. This is correct right?

These considerations describe the experience of time and distance for 'things', 'mass', 'matter'... This is correct right?

Velocity related slowing of time is a proven fact. Is this correct?

The Lorentz transformations are a description of these considerations. This is correct right?

General relativity describes the acceleration of gravity and position within a gravitational field and is a description of the space in between things. Is this correct?

And general relativity also decribes that 'things', 'mass', 'matter', will experience an increase in their rate of time in a decreased gravitational field, because time in a decreased gravitational field runs at a faster rate relative to the rate of time in an increased gravitational field. This is correct right?

The Lorentz transformations play a role in the general relativity field equations. Is this correct?

What I wish to understand is how the general relativity field equations have incorporated the concepts of special relativity that are, if I am correct in my thinking, concerning themselves with 'things', 'mass', 'matter', into describing the space between 'things', 'mass', 'matter', and how gravitational acceleration and general relativity time dilation fits into the GR field equations in relation to the Lorentz transformations.