Another Stupid Question

Time now is measured by the standard of the energy oscillation of certain elements. We do that because these changes in the push and pull (we can measure through the space between the element and the measuring instrumentality) take place in amazingly small, but still exactly consistent, gaps. A fact I mention as it helps to put emphasis on how important “wave length” is to the idea of time. One need only to remember that old light is distinguished from newer by it's red shift, with old having an equivalence to distance.

This sort of thing gets me to wondering, of course, and the minute that happens you can count on an ever increasing probability of another stupid question popping up. For instance, if the above paragraph has validity than it should also be valid to state that time is the space in duration. If that is the case how can it be the same now, in any absolute sense, as it was when the universe was only, say, half as expanded as it is now?

By the same token, if the rate of expansion changes, and it has been increasing its rate of increase lately, what effect does that have on time at one point in the history of expansion as opposed to another point a good distance down the road of that history.

I understand that the equations surrounding the description of expansion involve the interplay of ratios between known variables. In these the variance of density and energy distribution are taken into account. Time, however, if I understand it correctly (see the introduction in this paper), is the idealized constant assumed from the relative perspective of a free falling observer (an immaculate observer, as it were, conceived without any initial thrusting; much like an immaculate bit of singularly infinite mass). The thing is, even though, as a dollar might have seemed to be the same thing in 1932, as it was in, say, 2000, time now might not equate to the same distance, or quite the same way, as it did halfway past the big bang.

This also gets me to wondering whether, if we were to imagine sentients doing the same kinds of Astronomical observations, and particle experiments we've been doing for the last 100 years; sentients who existed during that halfway point between our time and the big bang, would their results be the same? Or would they at least indicate the same ratios operating between the same groups of constants our scientists work with now?

We already know that time is relative to the relative velocity between two observers. What about the relative characteristics of space time itself between two observers resolving probability within quite different states of expansion?

I know. There's a lot I don't understand at work here. Aspects that the more informed will no doubt be able to marshal as they enlighten me. Stupid question though it may be, hopefully all involved will find the exercise useful; especially as it might prompt the knowledgeable to better explain things to the rest of us.