Well, probably not, hence I've made this thread within the relative safety of the Pseudoscience forum.

Basically, I have this idea, which I am certain is either wrong or possibly 'not even wrong'. I'm not a scientist, I am a mere physics student, an undergraduate, and my knowledge of mathematics is poor for a physics student (I somewhat blagged my way into college, if I'm honest, I think they let me in because they mistook my enthusiasm for knowledge), but anyway, as I was saying, I'm a non-scientist, and thus I cannot be the first person to think of this, and since I cannot find it anywhere on the internet, I'm forced to conclude that it must just be so wrong that no one has ever bothered to write about it. But I must satisfy my curiosity, so I would like someone here who has a decent knowledge of physics (preferably post-grad, but not vital) to explain to me where I am going wrong in my reasoning, as I must be going wrong somewhere, surely...

Anyway, my reasoning is as follows:

Problem

1) The universe is an isolated system that began with the big bang, a singularity of (infinitesimal?) entropy.

2) The universe is expanding and its entropy is increasing. We are living at a point of moderate entropy.

3) Eventually entropy will reach maximum and the universe will be in complete thermal equilibrium. I think this point in time is referred to as heat death.

4) Since entropy tends to increase due to probability favouring disorder, it is considered somewhat paradoxical that the isolated system known as 'the universe' should have begun with low entropy, when the probability of a high entropy beginning was orders of magnitude more... well, probable. (Yes, poor vocabulary there, sorry).

Prelude to Solution

1) General relativity posits that the universe is composed of spacetime, a phenomenon which for reasons I cannot fathom is frequently referred to as a fabric. Spacetime is four-dimensional, thus the three dimensions of space are equivalent to a single axis on a 2D graph with relation to time as the other axis. So, the faster one traverses space, the slower one traverses time, and vice versa.

2) An often overlooked implication of this is that since space and time are two facets of the same thing, it follows that time is a dimension, and thus, it doesn't flow, it merely is. We perceive the flow of time due to our only remembering the past at any given point in spacetime. Our forward momentum through time is just an illusion. Time is real, but it doesn't flow.

3) The universe is therefore eternal. It has no beginning or end, it merely is. It is a four dimensional structure within which we exist but are only able to perceive the three dimensional manifold that is curved in the fourth dimension. The fourth dimension is in fact spatial in the sense that it is already there, but we perceive it as being temporal because at any given point along our world line, we can only see a cross section of the fourth dimension, we call this the present. This, coupled with our memory of the past gives us the illusion that we are flowing through the fourth dimension, and that the fourth dimension is therefore only temporal, when in reality the fourth dimension is spatial and we are distributed across it.

Solution

1) The universe had no beginning, because time is a feature of the universe, it is not something within which the universe is situated. Thus, the big bang was not the beginning. Rather, the big bang should be thought of as being the furthest most point at one end of the temporal axis. Likewise, at the other end of the temporal axis, at the furthest most point, is where heat death is to be found.

2) The universe is not expanding, because time is a feature of the universe, it is not something within which the universe is situated. Thus, just as we don't consider the universe to be expandingintoanything spatially, it also follows that we should not think of the universe as expandingthroughsomething temporally.

3) What we perceive as the expansion of the universe is in fact the increasing spatialwidth(I mean width as regards all three spatial dimensions, as opposed to just the one) of the universe, the further one is along the temporal axis.

4) The universe could therefore be thought of as a four dimensional cone, with the big bang at the apex and heat death at the base. The radial dimension of the cone is equivalent to our three spatial dimensions, with the 'height' dimension from base to apex being equivalent to our temporal dimension. The increase (expansion) in spatial radius along the temporal dimension is due to the sloping of the cone.

5) The universe did not begin with low entropy, because it has no beginning. Likewise, entropy is not increasing, because the universe is not expanding.

6) The reason that entropy is low at the apex is because the spatial dimensions at that point are compressed so much that there is no room (or perhaps I should say, no space) for disorder, the smaller the space, the higher the probability of low entropy, as there are fewer (in this case perhaps zero) potential states of disorder.

7) The reason that entropy is high at the base is self-explanatory. At this end of the temporal dimension, the universe is at its widest point spatially, and thus the probability of disorder is much greater.

Conclusion

I don't know, it's probably all a load of hot air. Please tell me where I'm going wrong with this interpretation of the universe.

Thank you.