On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:56:10 GMT, "Androcles"
wrote:


"Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
...
| To Endrocles,
|

| To be a scientist you have to have the courage to discard the illogical,
no
| matter what religion or cult tells you to the contrary. Because the
| scientific method doesn't allow for miracles.
| A body can be black or white, but it can't be both black AND white all
over,
| at any given point in time.
|
| "Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence of
| the improbable."
| H. L. Mencken (1880-1956), US journalist.
| Prejudices, 'Types of Men'
|
| Len.

I happen to agree with your fundamental philosophy, but when you state
velocity is independent of time when clearly everyone uses miles per hour,
'hour' being a unit of time, you are totally off your rocker.

Androcles


Don't be hard on Len. He has some excellent ideas.

Len is not completely wrong on that last one, A.

Consider a spaceship that fires its engine at a constant rate for a period.
You can say that its velocity is changing as a function of time WRT an external
point, such as its base. But to the ship's occupants (who have no windows) ,
the velocity is always zero, even though they know a force is acting on them.

Henri Wilson.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

See proof that light speed is source dependent.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe

To Henri,

Androcles is grasping at straws. Of course I know that speed is measured in
miles per hour.

What I am saying is that time doesn't slow down when you travel at high
speed, since speed and time do not affect each other.
That is to say, a mile will remain a mile and an hour will remain an hour no
matter at what speed, as related to a stationary observer, you are
travelling.

When I heat a pot of water, its temperature will rise. We refer to this as
cause and effect.
There is no cause and effect between length traveled and the rate at which
time flows.

It APPEARS as if the twin is aging more slowly on his way out to the
stationary twin, because it takes progressively longer and longer for the
image of the moving twin to reach the stationary twin. But just because you
see it, that doesn't make it so, since in actual fact both twins keep aging
at the normal rate.

By the way the OBSERVED aging rate of the moving twin is LESS than normal on
his way out, and GREATER than normal on his way in. Since one cancels out
the other, both twins will have aged the same normal length of time. In
other words, speed does not affect the rate at which time flows, the two do
not interact.

Len.
.................................................. .......
"Henri Wilson" H@.. wrote in message
news
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:56:10 GMT, "Androcles"
wrote:


"Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
...
| To Endrocles,
|

| To be a scientist you have to have the courage to discard the
illogical,
no
| matter what religion or cult tells you to the contrary. Because the
| scientific method doesn't allow for miracles.
| A body can be black or white, but it can't be both black AND white all
over,
| at any given point in time.
|
| "Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence
of
| the improbable."
| H. L. Mencken (1880-1956), US journalist.
| Prejudices, 'Types of Men'
|
| Len.

I happen to agree with your fundamental philosophy, but when you state
velocity is independent of time when clearly everyone uses miles per
hour,
'hour' being a unit of time, you are totally off your rocker.

Androcles


Don't be hard on Len. He has some excellent ideas.

Len is not completely wrong on that last one, A.

Consider a spaceship that fires its engine at a constant rate for a
period.
You can say that its velocity is changing as a function of time WRT an
external
point, such as its base. But to the ship's occupants (who have no windows)
,
the velocity is always zero, even though they know a force is acting on
them.

Henri Wilson.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

See proof that light speed is source dependent.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe

"Henri Wilson" H@.. wrote in message
news | On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:56:10 GMT, "Androcles"
| wrote:
|
|
| "Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
| ...
| | To Endrocles,
| |
|
| | To be a scientist you have to have the courage to discard the
illogical,
| no
| | matter what religion or cult tells you to the contrary. Because the
| | scientific method doesn't allow for miracles.
| | A body can be black or white, but it can't be both black AND white all
| over,
| | at any given point in time.
| |
| | "Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence
of
| | the improbable."
| | H. L. Mencken (1880-1956), US journalist.
| | Prejudices, 'Types of Men'
| |
| | Len.
|
| I happen to agree with your fundamental philosophy, but when you state
| velocity is independent of time when clearly everyone uses miles per
hour,
| 'hour' being a unit of time, you are totally off your rocker.
|
| Androcles
|
|
| Don't be hard on Len. He has some excellent ideas.

That would be fine, H, but Len doesn't back them up when challenged.
Instead he finds some one-line quote from a book he's read that
he supposes will make his point for him, usually irrelevant. His entire
campaign to promote his "selected papers" (who selected them, Len?)
is founded on his wild imagination that someone, somewhere is going
to believe his helical photon theory, fundamental to which is light
speed being observer dependent. Len wants to agree with that and
is proposing a physical cause for same; he totally ignores any
evidence to the contrary. Having great ideas is one thing. Refusing
to listen to the ideas of others, especially when backed by evidence,
places Len in the same psychological category as the aetherialists and
the relativists. He doesn't snip, but he doesn't respond either.


|
| Len is not completely wrong on that last one, A.
|
| Consider a spaceship that fires its engine at a constant rate for a
period.
| You can say that its velocity is changing as a function of time WRT an
external
| point, such as its base. But to the ship's occupants (who have no windows)
,
| the velocity is always zero, even though they know a force is acting on
them.

That is simply the principle of relativity.
The rocket exhaust isn't feeling any force though, and it has a velocity
relative
to the ship that is dependent on time. You cannot even discuss velocity
without
time. Sure it can be constant, but it is meaningless without change of
position as
as function of time.
Androcles.

|
| Henri Wilson.
| www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
|
| See proof that light speed is source dependent.
| www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe

"Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
...
| To Henri,
|
| Androcles is grasping at straws. Of course I know that speed is measured
in
| miles per hour.
|
| What I am saying is that time doesn't slow down when you travel at high
| speed, since speed and time do not affect each other.
| That is to say, a mile will remain a mile and an hour will remain an hour
no
| matter at what speed, as related to a stationary observer, you are
| travelling.
|
| When I heat a pot of water, its temperature will rise. We refer to this
as
| cause and effect.
| There is no cause and effect between length traveled and the rate at which
| time flows.
|
| It APPEARS as if the twin is aging more slowly on his way out to the
| stationary twin, because it takes progressively longer and longer for the
| image of the moving twin to reach the stationary twin. But just because
you
| see it, that doesn't make it so, since in actual fact both twins keep
aging
| at the normal rate.
|
| By the way the OBSERVED aging rate of the moving twin is LESS than normal
on
| his way out, and GREATER than normal on his way in. Since one cancels out
| the other, both twins will have aged the same normal length of time. In
| other words, speed does not affect the rate at which time flows, the two
do
| not interact.
|
| Len.

Rate at which time flows... is that seconds per second?
That's like metres per metre or kilograms per kilogram.
Meaningless.
Androcles.




| .................................................. ......
| "Henri Wilson" H@.. wrote in message
| news | On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:56:10 GMT, "Androcles"
| wrote:
|
|
| "Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
| ...
| | To Endrocles,
| |
|
| | To be a scientist you have to have the courage to discard the
| illogical,
| no
| | matter what religion or cult tells you to the contrary. Because the
| | scientific method doesn't allow for miracles.
| | A body can be black or white, but it can't be both black AND white
all
| over,
| | at any given point in time.
| |
| | "Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the
occurrence
| of
| | the improbable."
| | H. L. Mencken (1880-1956), US journalist.
| | Prejudices, 'Types of Men'
| |
| | Len.
|
| I happen to agree with your fundamental philosophy, but when you state
| velocity is independent of time when clearly everyone uses miles per
| hour,
| 'hour' being a unit of time, you are totally off your rocker.
|
| Androcles
|
|
| Don't be hard on Len. He has some excellent ideas.
|
| Len is not completely wrong on that last one, A.
|
| Consider a spaceship that fires its engine at a constant rate for a
| period.
| You can say that its velocity is changing as a function of time WRT an
| external
| point, such as its base. But to the ship's occupants (who have no
windows)
| ,
| the velocity is always zero, even though they know a force is acting on
| them.
|
| Henri Wilson.
| www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
|
| See proof that light speed is source dependent.
| www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe
|
|

On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 09:12:01 -0400, "Len Gaasenbeek"
wrote:

To Henri,

Androcles is grasping at straws. Of course I know that speed is measured in
miles per hour.

What I am saying is that time doesn't slow down when you travel at high
speed, since speed and time do not affect each other.
That is to say, a mile will remain a mile and an hour will remain an hour no
matter at what speed, as related to a stationary observer, you are
travelling.

When I heat a pot of water, its temperature will rise. We refer to this as
cause and effect.
There is no cause and effect between length traveled and the rate at which
time flows.

It APPEARS as if the twin is aging more slowly on his way out to the
stationary twin, because it takes progressively longer and longer for the
image of the moving twin to reach the stationary twin. But just because you
see it, that doesn't make it so, since in actual fact both twins keep aging
at the normal rate.

By the way the OBSERVED aging rate of the moving twin is LESS than normal on
his way out, and GREATER than normal on his way in. Since one cancels out
the other, both twins will have aged the same normal length of time. In
other words, speed does not affect the rate at which time flows, the two do
not interact.

I agree entirely with that Len.
Other people like to introduce fairytales into the problem..


Len.
................................................. .......
"Henri Wilson" H@.. wrote in message
news
On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:56:10 GMT, "Androcles"
wrote:


"Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
...
| To Endrocles,
|

| To be a scientist you have to have the courage to discard the
illogical,
no
| matter what religion or cult tells you to the contrary. Because the
| scientific method doesn't allow for miracles.
| A body can be black or white, but it can't be both black AND white all
over,
| at any given point in time.
|
| "Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence
of
| the improbable."
| H. L. Mencken (1880-1956), US journalist.
| Prejudices, 'Types of Men'
|
| Len.

I happen to agree with your fundamental philosophy, but when you state
velocity is independent of time when clearly everyone uses miles per
hour,
'hour' being a unit of time, you are totally off your rocker.

Androcles


Don't be hard on Len. He has some excellent ideas.

Len is not completely wrong on that last one, A.

Consider a spaceship that fires its engine at a constant rate for a
period.
You can say that its velocity is changing as a function of time WRT an
external
point, such as its base. But to the ship's occupants (who have no windows)
,
the velocity is always zero, even though they know a force is acting on
them.

Henri Wilson.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

See proof that light speed is source dependent.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe



Henri Wilson.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

See proof that light speed is source dependent.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 14:25:46 GMT, "Androcles"
wrote:


"Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
...
| To Henri,
|
| Androcles is grasping at straws. Of course I know that speed is measured
in
| miles per hour.
|
| What I am saying is that time doesn't slow down when you travel at high
| speed, since speed and time do not affect each other.
| That is to say, a mile will remain a mile and an hour will remain an hour
no
| matter at what speed, as related to a stationary observer, you are
| travelling.
|
| When I heat a pot of water, its temperature will rise. We refer to this
as
| cause and effect.
| There is no cause and effect between length traveled and the rate at which
| time flows.
|
| It APPEARS as if the twin is aging more slowly on his way out to the
| stationary twin, because it takes progressively longer and longer for the
| image of the moving twin to reach the stationary twin. But just because
you
| see it, that doesn't make it so, since in actual fact both twins keep
aging
| at the normal rate.
|
| By the way the OBSERVED aging rate of the moving twin is LESS than normal
on
| his way out, and GREATER than normal on his way in. Since one cancels out
| the other, both twins will have aged the same normal length of time. In
| other words, speed does not affect the rate at which time flows, the two
do
| not interact.
|
| Len.

Rate at which time flows... is that seconds per second?
That's like metres per metre or kilograms per kilogram.
Meaningless

Not so, A.

The gradient of a hill is in metres/metre.
We sugar our cups of tea in 'gms/gm'.
Gold deposits are graded grms/tonne.

Similarly 'sec/sec' has meaning if there are two or more time sub-dimensions.



Androcles.




| .................................................. ......
| "Henri Wilson" H@.. wrote in message
| news | On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:56:10 GMT, "Androcles"
| wrote:
|
|
| "Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
| ...
| | To Endrocles,
| |
|
| | To be a scientist you have to have the courage to discard the
| illogical,
| no
| | matter what religion or cult tells you to the contrary. Because the
| | scientific method doesn't allow for miracles.
| | A body can be black or white, but it can't be both black AND white
all
| over,
| | at any given point in time.
| |
| | "Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the
occurrence
| of
| | the improbable."
| | H. L. Mencken (1880-1956), US journalist.
| | Prejudices, 'Types of Men'
| |
| | Len.
|
| I happen to agree with your fundamental philosophy, but when you state
| velocity is independent of time when clearly everyone uses miles per
| hour,
| 'hour' being a unit of time, you are totally off your rocker.
|
| Androcles
|
|
| Don't be hard on Len. He has some excellent ideas.
|
| Len is not completely wrong on that last one, A.
|
| Consider a spaceship that fires its engine at a constant rate for a
| period.
| You can say that its velocity is changing as a function of time WRT an
| external
| point, such as its base. But to the ship's occupants (who have no
windows)
| ,
| the velocity is always zero, even though they know a force is acting on
| them.
|
| Henri Wilson.
| www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
|
| See proof that light speed is source dependent.
| www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe
|
|



Henri Wilson.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

See proof that light speed is source dependent.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe

"Henri Wilson" H@.. wrote in message
news | On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 14:25:46 GMT, "Androcles"
| wrote:
|
|
| "Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
| ...
| | To Henri,
| |
| | Androcles is grasping at straws. Of course I know that speed is
measured
| in
| | miles per hour.
| |
| | What I am saying is that time doesn't slow down when you travel at high
| | speed, since speed and time do not affect each other.
| | That is to say, a mile will remain a mile and an hour will remain an
hour
| no
| | matter at what speed, as related to a stationary observer, you are
| | travelling.
| |
| | When I heat a pot of water, its temperature will rise. We refer to
this
| as
| | cause and effect.
| | There is no cause and effect between length traveled and the rate at
which
| | time flows.
| |
| | It APPEARS as if the twin is aging more slowly on his way out to the
| | stationary twin, because it takes progressively longer and longer for
the
| | image of the moving twin to reach the stationary twin. But just
because
| you
| | see it, that doesn't make it so, since in actual fact both twins keep
| aging
| | at the normal rate.
| |
| | By the way the OBSERVED aging rate of the moving twin is LESS than
normal
| on
| | his way out, and GREATER than normal on his way in. Since one cancels
out
| | the other, both twins will have aged the same normal length of time.
In
| | other words, speed does not affect the rate at which time flows, the
two
| do
| | not interact.
| |
| | Len.
|
| Rate at which time flows... is that seconds per second?
| That's like metres per metre or kilograms per kilogram.
| Meaningless
|
| Not so, A.
|
| The gradient of a hill is in metres/metre.

Shudder. Henri, in case you didn't notice, and I want you to concentrate
really hard now, there are THREE spatial dimensions. The gradient of a hill
uses TWO dimensions, nne vertical and the other horizontal. (Actually we use
the height and the hypotenuse, but that is simply convenience for a public
that has no knowledge of trigonometry.) We don't ever use metre per metre
in the horizontal plane, it is meaningless.



| We sugar our cups of tea in 'gms/gm'.

Really?
How many spoonfuls per spoonful do you use, H? One, perhaps?
I have 2 spoonsfuls in my coffee, but I only ever take one spoonful per
spoonful, one gram per gram, one ton per ton, one tonne per tonne.
How many tons are there in a ton, H?
Which is heavier, a ton of feathers or a ton of pig iron, H?
Or is it a ton of lead?
My granddaughter asked ME that, hoping to trip me up, H,
with a grin on her face.

| Gold deposits are graded grms/tonne.

How many grams in a tonne, H? Could it possibly be 1 million exactly?
How many microseconds are there in a second?


|
| Similarly 'sec/sec' has meaning if there are two or more time
sub-dimensions.

"If"? What do you mean, "if"? This is physics we are discussing, not
tick fairies. There are NOT two or more time dimensions, and secs/sec
always has the value ONE. IF you have two or more time dimensions
as there are two or more spatial dimensions, THEN you can have tick fairies.

So as I said, seconds per second is meaningless.
|
| Androcles.
|
|
|
|
| | .................................................. ......
| | "Henri Wilson" H@.. wrote in message
| | news | | On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:56:10 GMT, "Androcles"
| | wrote:
| |
| |
| | "Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
| | ...
| | | To Endrocles,
| | |
| |
| | | To be a scientist you have to have the courage to discard the
| | illogical,
| | no
| | | matter what religion or cult tells you to the contrary. Because
the
| | | scientific method doesn't allow for miracles.
| | | A body can be black or white, but it can't be both black AND white
| all
| | over,
| | | at any given point in time.
| | |
| | | "Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the
| occurrence
| | of
| | | the improbable."
| | | H. L. Mencken (1880-1956), US journalist.
| | | Prejudices, 'Types of Men'
| | |
| | | Len.
| |
| | I happen to agree with your fundamental philosophy, but when you
state
| | velocity is independent of time when clearly everyone uses miles per
| | hour,
| | 'hour' being a unit of time, you are totally off your rocker.
| |
| | Androcles
| |
| |
| | Don't be hard on Len. He has some excellent ideas.
| |
| | Len is not completely wrong on that last one, A.
| |
| | Consider a spaceship that fires its engine at a constant rate for a
| | period.
| | You can say that its velocity is changing as a function of time WRT
an
| | external
| | point, such as its base. But to the ship's occupants (who have no
| windows)
| | ,
| | the velocity is always zero, even though they know a force is acting
on
| | them.
| |
| | Henri Wilson.
| | www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
| |
| | See proof that light speed is source dependent.
| | www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe
| |
| |
|
|
|
| Henri Wilson.
| www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
|
| See proof that light speed is source dependent.
| www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe

"Androcles" wrote in message ...

"Henri Wilson" H@.. wrote in message
news | On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 14:25:46 GMT, "Androcles"
| wrote:

[snip]

| Rate at which time flows... is that seconds per second?
| That's like metres per metre or kilograms per kilogram.
| Meaningless
|
| Not so, A.
|
| The gradient of a hill is in metres/metre.

Shudder. Henri, in case you didn't notice, and I want you to concentrate
really hard now, there are THREE spatial dimensions. The gradient of a hill
uses TWO dimensions, nne vertical and the other horizontal. (Actually we use
the height and the hypotenuse, but that is simply convenience for a public
that has no knowledge of trigonometry.) We don't ever use metre per metre
in the horizontal plane, it is meaningless.

:-)))
Shudder - The Gradient of an Androcles:
http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/di.../Gradient.html
Come on Wilson, don't let him bully you. Defend yourself
and make us laugh when he starts making an even bigger
fool of his miserable self :-)

Dirk Vdm

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 14:20:17 GMT, "Androcles"
wrote:


"Henri Wilson" H@.. wrote in message
news | On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:56:10 GMT, "Androcles"
| wrote:
|
|
| "Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
| ...
| | To Endrocles,
| |
|
| | To be a scientist you have to have the courage to discard the
illogical,
| no
| | matter what religion or cult tells you to the contrary. Because the
| | scientific method doesn't allow for miracles.
| | A body can be black or white, but it can't be both black AND white all
| over,
| | at any given point in time.
| |
| | "Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence
of
| | the improbable."
| | H. L. Mencken (1880-1956), US journalist.
| | Prejudices, 'Types of Men'
| |
| | Len.
|
| I happen to agree with your fundamental philosophy, but when you state
| velocity is independent of time when clearly everyone uses miles per
hour,
| 'hour' being a unit of time, you are totally off your rocker.
|
| Androcles
|
|
| Don't be hard on Len. He has some excellent ideas.

That would be fine, H, but Len doesn't back them up when challenged.
Instead he finds some one-line quote from a book he's read that
he supposes will make his point for him, usually irrelevant. His entire
campaign to promote his "selected papers" (who selected them, Len?)
is founded on his wild imagination that someone, somewhere is going
to believe his helical photon theory, fundamental to which is light
speed being observer dependent. Len wants to agree with that and
is proposing a physical cause for same; he totally ignores any
evidence to the contrary. Having great ideas is one thing. Refusing
to listen to the ideas of others, especially when backed by evidence,
places Len in the same psychological category as the aetherialists and
the relativists. He doesn't snip, but he doesn't respond either.


|
| Len is not completely wrong on that last one, A.
|
| Consider a spaceship that fires its engine at a constant rate for a
period.
| You can say that its velocity is changing as a function of time WRT an
external
| point, such as its base. But to the ship's occupants (who have no windows)
,
| the velocity is always zero, even though they know a force is acting on
them.

That is simply the principle of relativity.
The rocket exhaust isn't feeling any force though, and it has a velocity
relative
to the ship that is dependent on time. You cannot even discuss velocity
without
time. Sure it can be constant, but it is meaningless without change of
position as
as function of time.
Androcles.

Sure, A.
That's why I said Len is not ENTIRELY wrong.




Henri Wilson.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

See proof that light speed is source dependent.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 12:04:28 GMT, "Androcles"
wrote:


"Henri Wilson" H@.. wrote in message
news | On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 14:25:46 GMT, "Androcles"
| wrote:
|

|
| Rate at which time flows... is that seconds per second?
| That's like metres per metre or kilograms per kilogram.
| Meaningless
|
| Not so, A.
|
| The gradient of a hill is in metres/metre.

Shudder. Henri, in case you didn't notice, and I want you to concentrate
really hard now, there are THREE spatial dimensions. The gradient of a hill
uses TWO dimensions, nne vertical and the other horizontal. (Actually we use
the height and the hypotenuse, but that is simply convenience for a public
that has no knowledge of trigonometry.) We don't ever use metre per metre
in the horizontal plane, it is meaningless.

That's correct. There must be more than one spatial dimension for
'metres/metre' to be meaningful.

...but if you take a metre rule out into space, it doesn't wont tell you if it
is pointing along x, y or z.




| We sugar our cups of tea in 'gms/gm'.

Really?
How many spoonfuls per spoonful do you use, H? One, perhaps?
I have 2 spoonsfuls in my coffee, but I only ever take one spoonful per
spoonful, one gram per gram, one ton per ton, one tonne per tonne.
How many tons are there in a ton, H?

1 gm sugar to 100gms coffee, A.

The 'sugar' and 'coffee' effectively define two mass subdimensions.

That's why you can't add apples to oranges.


Which is heavier, a ton of feathers or a ton of pig iron, H?
Or is it a ton of lead?
My granddaughter asked ME that, hoping to trip me up, H,
with a grin on her face.

| Gold deposits are graded grms/tonne.

How many grams in a tonne, H? Could it possibly be 1 million exactly?
How many microseconds are there in a second?

A, you are giving Dinky lots of ammunition here.



|
| Similarly 'sec/sec' has meaning if there are two or more time
sub-dimensions.

"If"? What do you mean, "if"? This is physics we are discussing, not
tick fairies. There are NOT two or more time dimensions, and secs/sec
always has the value ONE. IF you have two or more time dimensions
as there are two or more spatial dimensions, THEN you can have tick fairies.

So as I said, seconds per second is meaningless.

Not so A.
I can set my watch to run at 0.9 secs/second(UTC)

Warning: Beware of the deranged one!

Henri Wilson.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

See proof that light speed is source dependent.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe