It seems that the history of physics is interlaced with the concept of intellectual property. It always troubled me that Einstein was so heavily promoted, when a large number of physicists actually did the ground work for the concepts that were popularized. I am certain that it has much more to do with who benefited from the revenue stream of the books that were published than the physics itself. It was in their interest to brand physics with the person who was under contract to publish. I suppose this is what really troubles me about the way Einstein is portrayed as the one and only source of all good bits. It seems it is an extension of the publishing business that has existed since the origin of the public press. Today it is simple to publish information and this reliance on the copyright and the concept of ownership of the information is vastly outdated.
The physics of situation transforms can be applied as a matrix operation and it seems to me that it is just that. It can be much more informative to have a .blend file with the python math of some transform applied in a specific situation than a thousand page book postulating what cats would do in boxes and whether they are alive or dead. I can take a situation and perform the transforms for fields and velocity and gravity and then save it as a .blend or express it as an HTML5 object. It seems inappropriate to allow publishing companies to stake a claim in the middle of physics and parade their prize pig with new lipstick , every few years, as if it is new art.
The same thing happens in many different areas. The language of emotional manipulation is a learned language and I would bet that much of the emotional language of movies is lost on those who have not been situationally exposed to the association of music, performance, expression, and emotion. It is how we learn language and it would seem that many people seek to control the language itself. Without a new model for how people interact and share information, it will continue to be a problem. I doubt that even 1% of any gain from intellectual property is ever applied to feed and support those who produce that content.
Here is a link to Florida State and some clear presentations on the transforms themselves. It would seem that perhaps I really should do a .blend of axis transforms and publish the python code as well as the .blend file. Perhaps I will gain something in creating the relativity blend and observing an animation of it. It would seem a far better way to present a concept so that it could be observed, interacted with, modified, and extended. It is possible to place location sound files in the blend which can be activated and in such a way it becomes a rich multimedia environment that can be rendered to a complete presentation video, like any other form.
I think I will just make a python module that is relativity transform physics for blend. It is well suited for such a thing and I haven't seen it on the net, but perhaps I should look before I leap into it.