Hi Cavediver.
Reading your post, I must say it is most intriguing, regardless of whether or not I understand it in its entirety. However, reading over The Universe in a Nutshell, Stephen Hawking, (the layperson's edition of A Brief History of Time), Hawking claims that he and Penrose had proved time had a beginning by using mathematical theorums.
Hawking writes:
As one follows our past light cone back still further, the positive density of matter causes the light rays to bend toward each other more strongly. The cross section of the light cone will shrink to zero size in a finite time.
This means that all the matter inside our past light cone is trapped in a region whose boundary shrinks to zero. It is therefore not very surprising that Penrose and I could prove that in the mathematical model of general relativity, time must have a beginning in what is called the bing bang.
Similar arguments show that time would have an end, when stars or galaxies collapse under their own gravity to form black holes. We had sidestepped Kant's antinomy of pure reason by dropping his implicit assumption that time had a meaning independent of the universe.
Our paper, proving time had a beginning, won the second prize in the competition sponsored by the Gravity Research Foundation in 1968...
There were various reactions to our work. It upset many physicists, but it delighted those religious leaders who believed in an act of creation, for here was scientific proof.
I am probably misunderstanding what exactly you are trying to get across. It appears you are claiming time only exists within our universe, and that a "beginning" is questionable. However, Hawking seems quite adament that time did have a beginning. Do you think you could lend a helping hand to an interested yet greatly uninformed science enthusiast?
Thank you, Cavediver.