All I am saying is that a definition is a definition. Where the chickens come home to roost is not with a variation of time or space by the atomic clock and c, it is with a variation of mass or some other property and that would reveal the true nature of reality. It does not appear that this nanowire experiment will have the precision to measure the decay of matter over several years.
Science fixes time and space by definition, but cannot yet measure mass variation with anyway near the precision of time as atomic frequency. Fixing time and space end up shifting all of the variability left to mass, but that variation in mass would still only be equivalent to 1 second in 64 years of equivalent time.
Precision measurements of mass over long periods of time either validate or falsify the notion of matter decay. Science is in a state of denial and dismisses its own measurements of matter decay as being due to systematic errors. Look, there are many sources for variability in measurements of time and mass. Science's current paradigm fixes time and space by definition of clock frequency and c, but science cannot fix mass with any greater precision than the equivalent of 1 second in 64 years.
The new watt balance weighs the energy of a superconducting current loop and may show decay of matter given 5-10 years of measurement. The LISA interferometer may also show this once launched into Lagrange 1 orbit this year. The very slow decay is a second dimension of time and that decay is not consistent with the current paradigm of mainstream science.
However, matter decay seems to show up in the IPK decay and the spin decay decay of the earth and the average decays of millisecond pulsars and just about everywhere I look. When I first got this notion of universal decay, I thought for sure there would be any number of measurements that would prove that matter does not decay. Alas, I have been unable to find any, but maybe I am wrong.
A universal decay is a fun concept, though, since it permits a moving frame to know how fast it is moving relative to the CMB. In a moving frame, although time and c do not appear to change, the measurement of matter decay does appear to slow down. Knowing the universal matter decay then tells the moving frame its absolute velocity.
This does not mean that relativity is wrong, just that the notions of GR are limited by our notions of continuous space, motion, and time. Matter decay is a notion that seems to augment the limitations of continuous space, motion, and time.