The same applies to rotation. Accelerometers placed on my floor and on my body will detect the difference, and both will agree.
To put it differently, if I pass someone on the train moving at constant velocity, there's no experiment that I can perform which proves that I'm moving while the other person is standing still, or vice versa.
However, if I'm in a centrifuge, instead of on a train, then I can figure out which one of us is moving by measuring who is pressed up against the wall and making funny faces.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach's_principle
An important implication of relativity is that when you push something, you do not change it's velocity. You change it's acceleration. It's a small but important distinction. Acceleration is more fundamental.
Of course, I may be ignorant of his actual intent.
According to relativity, isn't the view that the universe is rotating just as valid as the view that you are rotating? It all depends on your perspective, and there is no privileged (absolute) vantage point or perspective.
Isn't that so? And if it is so, how can this physicist be ignorant of this?
[Update: Oops. I missed the "and stop" bit. That's what I get for reading HN while I'm half asleep. Sorry!]