If your supposition is correct that God created Time first, then Time "dragged" space along with it, then the way you work out the consequences is impressive, extremely well done.
But I guess I'm fairly well wedded to Einstein's "unification" of space and time, along with his stipulation that the speed of light is a universal constant (or became such at some point in the evolution of His Creation?).
You reverse Newton's presupposition of Absolute Space: That is, first God created space, and then He made things to fill it over Time.
I don't think Newton's view is correct (because of my acceptance of Einstein's unification).
One thing I do think is needful is your concept of "volumetric time," which, to me, posits additional temporal dimension(s) beyond the familiar three-space/one-time construct that can be directly verified by observation and experience.
P. S. Wesson seems to be addressing this in his article, "Quantum-Mechanical Consequences of Five-Dimensional Relativity". In his Abstract, Wesson writes:
I outline a model where a massive particle in 4D spacetime follows a null or photon-like path in 5D canonical space. This leads to wave-particle duality, quantization and a Heisenberg-like uncertainty relation, along with other effects which show that it is possible to unify general relativity and quantum mechanics in 5D."I gather Wesson's project here is quite modest as compared with yours. But the point is he needs to add a fifth, timelike dimension in order to solve certain elusive puzzles about the nature of our Universe.
Time in the 4D construct is irreversible, linear, serial, moving past to present to future. All causation on this model can only be local causation. It looks to me that the additional temporal dimension you propose in your model of volumetric time is essential to the understanding of non-local causation.
I have no clue how many dimensions there actually are. I've seen proposals (e.g., from the Russian mathematician P. D. Ouspensky) of as many as seven. But Nachmonides may well be right there are ten.
What troubles me (somehow) is the idea of God adding dimensions as the Universe unfolds, in mid-course, so to speak.
Of course, if God wants to work that way, who am I to complain? My point is, this appears to be inconsistent with Jeremiah 31:33: As Buggman recently pointed out, "God [in] several places in His Word points to the constant laws of nature as being proof of His justice and steadfastness to Israel." (Which is also an argument in favor of the constancy of C.) But then, Jeremiah says, "after those days." I guess I have a bit more studying to do, to discover the significance of that statement: I am not well schooled in Old Testament texts. (Buggman, can you help me here?)
Anyhoot, I applaud your outstanding effort here, dear brother in Christ. Yet clearly, I do not yet understand it. If you can help me with that, I'd be grateful.
In His love and peace.
p.s.: Sorry to be so long getting back to you. My FIL passed away last Saturday, and I've been mostly preoccupied with family matters since then.
Using the axiom(s) that without space things do not exist and without time events do not occur, I would offer that a photon has aspects of space, time, and energy, but it crosses the Universe always in the present of its emission. When a photon arrives at a sensor it has no inertia, so it has no inertial mass. Something makes the photon different in spatial or temporal characteristics from other things that exist. I am convinced from the work of Haisch, et al that the something is the temporal aspect ... the time of a photon is planar time, not linear time. But then I’m also convinced that it is the temporal nature (linear time bound to the zero points) of the zero point field that gives masses their inertial mass and causes gravity, so you might want to just ignore what I write, for another fifty years to pass before utilizing these realities.
I’m so sorry to hear of that.
I’ll keep you in prayer in regard to that.