Two dimensions of time - a simpler way to visualise relativity?

Einstein’s theory of special relativity, published in 1905 transformed the physical interpretation of space and time but remains difficult to conceptualise. Whether taught in terms of different observers passing each other on trains and communicating with light beams or in terms of higher mathematics, the conclusions of relativity are deduced but an intuitive understanding often remains elusive.
This brief train of thought outlines an alternative, perhaps more intuitive way to visualise special relativity based on two ‘dimensions’ of time. There are some figures but I cannot find a way to post these. I would welcome any thoughts on this…particularly any fundamental flaws?
Einstein’s theory of special relativity envisaged light travelling at a constant velocity, c, in a four dimensional spacetime. The conceptual leap I would encourage you to make is to consider what if light (and any other particle or entity ) travels at a constant velocity, c, in a four dimensional spacetime such that if the particle is travelling at the velocity c in one spatial or time dimension it is stationary in the other dimensions. If travelling through multiple dimensions the velocity vector is always constant, c.
In this way of viewing spacetime, the very concept of travelling though the time dimension, implies there must be a second dimension of time because ‘travelling’ implies a rate of change over time but the dimension being travelled through is the time dimension.
For the purposes of this discussion we will call these two dimension of time perceived time for the special dimension and absolute time for the constant rate of change in the four dimensions, c.
Making this simple postulate we can then deduce all the equations of special relativity using Pythagoras.

Time dilation:
For simplicity consider a particle travelling in one special dimension and the perceived time dimension (stationary in the other two special dimensions) – Figure 1. This particle travelling at a rate of change of position in these two dimensions of c in absolute time.
The perceived time (Vt)(meant to be perceived velocity? or use T for time) is related to the velocity in the one special dimension (Vs) by the following equation
Vs2 + Vt2 = c2
If the particle is stationary in the one special dimension the velocity though perceived time will be so the time dilation, Vt/c, i.e the perceived time relative to stationary is then derived by rearrangement of the above equation to be
Vt/c = (1-Vs2/c2)1/2

Why is light perceived to have a constant velocity by all observers?
Consider the four spacetime dimensions to be fixed and a common frame of reference for all particles within it and where light has a special property that it only travels in the three spatial dimensions and not in the perceived time dimension. In the situation where an observer is stationary in space, they will be travelling at c though perceived time and a photon of light passing them will be travelling orthogonally at c though space (Figure 2) for every period of elapsed perceived time for the observer the photon will move in space with a perceived velocity of c.
Now consider the situation where the observer is moving in the same direction as the photon and for the purposes of example at half the speed though space as though perceived time (Figure 3). The relative absolute velocity of the photon in the 4D space time is now lower by a factor of 1.4 (the square root of 2). However, the progression of perceived time for the observer is also slower by the same factor and hence the photon is perceived to be travelling at the same relative velocity.

Why is kinetic energy ½ mv2 but absolute energy mc2
Have you ever wondered why given that the energy of particle in special relativity is mc2 but kinetic energy in low velocity Newtonian physics is 1/2mv2. This can be conceptualised in the above model in the following way. Consider two identical particles of mass m at rest in space in the 4D spacetime so both travelling at c though perceived time and have an energy of mc2 in absolute 4D space. A force then acts to push them apart after which they both move in opposite directions with a speed though space of v. they are now travelling at a slightly smaller speed though perceived time (Figure 4). Their absolute energy in the 4D spacetime remains the same but this can be viewed to have two components mv2 in space and c2-v2 in the perceived time dimension. Hence the total energy in the space dimensions for both particles is 2mv2. At low velocities however they will perceive each other receding at a relative velocity (Vr) of 2v. Hence if the perceived kinetic energy of one particle viewed by the other is the same as the absolute energy in space then this will be perceived as 2mv2 = 2m (Vr/2)2 = 1/2mVr2.

Why does every particle have an antiparticle and they annihilate each other when they meet in space?
In this conceptualisation of 4D space time, there is no reason to assume that travel though perceived time could not happen in both directions, just as travel through the spatial dimensions can be in either direction. This could provide a neat conceptualisation of matter and antimatter being the same particles but travelling in opposite directions in the perceived time dimension. Thus two identical particles in the same position in space but with different directions of travel at c in the perceived time dimension could conceptually collide and annihilate with a total collision energy of 2mc2. This then begs the question, do the particles need to be in the same position in perceived time in order to collide? The observation is that particles do annihilate so does this imply that separation in the perceived time dimension is not a practical reality, in contrast to the spatial dimensions. Perhaps not..as things become distant in spatial dimensions they become harder to see and less influential, perhaps particles can only interact over a certain distance through perceived time and as antimatter particles are only short lived in our experimental models we have not tested a sufficient separation in perceived time – this may be experimentally testable.

Another way to look at the big bang?
What would a big bang look like in this 4D space? One might conceive the bang expanding in all four dimensions and so both backwards and forwards in the perceived time dimension. In this model the particles travelling back in the perceived time dimension would become separated in perceived time from the particles travelling forward in the perceived time dimension and so there would be a separation of the matter and antimatter into different regions along the perceived time dimension. We live in what we call the matter region of this 4D space (Figure 6)

What about relativistic contraction?
……….needs more thought - any suggestions?

Conclusion
The concept of two time dimensions seems to provide a simple model to conceptualise space time and the postulates of special relativity. Whether this reflects any underlying reality remains to be seen