Before one you sticklers points my mistake out for me, again, I realize that it is not true that a change in location implies an acceleration. An object could simply be moving at a constant velocity between locations. But that is not the case for the dropped object in question. A more accurate description is that acceleration is implied when an object with a particular velocity in any particular frame of reference shows up at a location to where its former velocity would not have taken it. I think I have that right . . .

Michael Williams
Arroyo Grande, CA USA