Question: So my question is this that suppose we consider a solid everyday object, say a spherical stone. Now, if I consider an atom or a molecule of the stone away from the center of the stone, then I can say that the gravitational force on the atom/molecule is non zero due to the other atoms/molecular constituents of the stone in question. So what force balances this unbalanced gravitational force? 

If it is the electric repulsion due to the other atoms then why does the body not explode outward, for the electric repulsion due to the other atoms is way stronger than the gravitational force? Or am I missing something here? 

Also, does the crystal structure of arrangement of atoms inside the solid play a role in this?

Answer: 
> 
> In relativity when an observer records an event some distance away
>  from him, the timing of the event he measures would be different from
>  what he would measure if he was close to the event as light would take
>  some time to reach him.
> 
> 
> 

This isn't true in Special Relativity (SR) - the *observed* time of an event *is* the time recorded by a (synchronized) clock *at* the spatial location of the event, and it is *not* the time that light from the event reaches the origin.

That is, *observing* is the not the same as *seeing* (or [photographing](http://users.monash.edu.au/~leo/research/movies/sr/sr-wmv.html)) in SR. From the Wikipedia article [Observer (special relativity)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_(special_relativity)):

> 
> The special relativity usage differs significantly from the ordinary
>  English meaning of "observer". Reference frames are inherently
>  nonlocal constructs, covering all of space and time or a nontrivial
>  part of it; thus it does not make sense to speak of an observer (in
>  the special relativistic sense) having a location. Also, an inertial
>  observer cannot accelerate at a later time, nor can an accelerating
>  observer stop accelerating.
> 
> 
> Physicists use the term "observer" as shorthand for a specific
>  reference frame from which a set of objects or events is being
>  measured. Speaking of an observer in special relativity is not
>  specifically hypothesizing an individual person who is experiencing
>  events, but rather it is a particular mathematical context which
>  objects and events are to be evaluated from. The effects of special
>  relativity occur whether or not there is a sentient being within the
>  inertial reference frame to witness them.
> 
> 
> 

In summary, an (inertial) *observer* in SR is not a being with a definite location but is, conceptually, a system of unaccelerated rods and (synchronized) clocks at relative rest that assign space and time coordinates to each event.
I would expect that most observers would take into account the speed it takes the light to reach them, when they measure the time of an event. So, two observers with zero relative velocity to each other, but at different distances from an event, would measure the same occurrence time for the event (assuming they have synchronized clocks).