[bojan]

My mistake, it was "The Fabric of the Cosmos - B. Greene".

This is very interesting book, you should read it...

Some relevant quotes are below:

Mach offered an answer to this objection. In an empty universe,
according to Mach, you feel nothing if you spin (more precisely, there is
not even a concept of spinning vs. nonspinning). At the other end of the
spectrum, in a universe populated by all the stars and other material
objects existing in our real universe, the splaying force on your arms and
legs is what you experience when you actually spin.

Einstein and others repeatedly considered the question of rotating motion using
the insights of special relativity; they concluded, like Newton and unlike
Mach, that even in an otherwise completely empty universe you would
feel the outward pull from spinning-Homer would feel pressed against
the inner mall of a spinning bucket; the rope between the two whirling
rocks would pull taut.' Hawking dismantled Newton's absolute space and
absolute time, how did Einstein explain this?
The answer is surprising. Its name notwithstanding, Einstein's theory
does not proclaim that everything is relative. Special relativity does claim
that some things are relative: velocities are relative; distances across space are relative; durations of elapsed time are relative. But the theory actually introduces a grand, new, sweepingly absolute concept: absolute spacetime.
Absolute spacetime is as absolute for speciai relativity as absolute
space and absolute time were for Newton, and partly for this reason Einstein
did not suggest or particularly like the name "relativity theory."
Instead, he and other physicists suggested invariance theories, stressing that the theory, at its core, involves something that everyone agrees on, something that is not relative

So, space and time and moving in space and time are relative things, but spacetime is different, it is absolute.