| > No you haven't, you only think you have.
| > Do it again, properly, and I'll point out your error.
| > Androcles
| >
|
| Well, I don't know how "proper" this is, but here's a reprise
| of my earlier thought-stream.
|
| I make the following assumptions.
|
| [1] coincident origins, primarily for my convenience.

Ok.
0------1------2------3-------4--x  k frame, t = 0.
0'-----1'-----2'------3'------4--x'  K frame, tau = 0.

| [2] Translation definition.

0-------1-------2-------3-------4--x  t = 1.
|<-vt->|<-vt->|<-vt->|<-vt->|---|<-vt->|
--------0'-------1'------2'------3'------4--x'  tau = 1.
x' = x+vt.
Sanity check:
0' = 0+vt = 1 when t = 1, v = 1.
Looks good.