My comment was about time only. To be literal, speed is velocity. Both speed and velocity are linear. Speed just ignores direction, but linear motion is required for speed. Speed gives us a way to average velocity, without direction. I should not use speed when describing angular motion, because it is acceleration, but the term speed is common to the quickness of any motion. For most people.

The speed of density that I referred to, was rotational density, not kinetic. I wrongly assumed that when referring to e, rotation was implied. Pardon me.

I reason with classical physics.

The first mode of relativity was discovered and described by Ampere. Relative angle. The second mode of relativity was discovered and described by Weber. Relative velocity.....and he confirmed relative angle. Weber did this 40-50 years before Einstein. The term c, comes from Weber. c was not the V of light. It was the V where E equals M. Emission happens to have equal E and M.

And Parsons gave us a structural dynamic, which can maintain a constant tangential V of a rotation,(TV) with an adjustable angular acceleration.(AV) of rotation. This is done by giving an adjustable ratio......between the diameter and the circumference. A variable "pi" rotation.

Our current math transforms, or comparisons between TV and AV only work in 2D. Using pi. Until that is corrected, math can not prove and it can not disprove 3D motion.

I am not trying to pester you, just saying that there are alternative classical explanations for the events that space-time tries to explain. Changing length or changing time is not needed to explain experimental results. And that only a left handed e and a right handed e, are needed to explain all matter.

I think a variable pi rotation can explain the un-expected rotational V of stars in galaxies.

No dark matter needed.

I won't bother you further. Good luck with your studies and understanding. I hope you find something new. We all need it.