I see, this or some form of unobserved longterm oscillation could explain the expansion indicating nothing towards origin.
The fixation on time in that post stems from the initial premise being of an eternal universe, so no beginning, and until I see time travel I'm of the belief that time (or us along such or whatever) moves forward. And through such an origin to the universe, as even if all of time looped around converged to a single point, it only being observed to move forward indicates that this loop must of initiated at some point. This also aligns with all physical objects seeming to have an origin (i.e something coming from nothing). Such that if you are to suggest the big bang is us coming from the outward flow of the centre of the torus above, all the physical stuff that existed in that recompression still came from something. This concept, causation, along with my above thoughts with time is what I was referring in my first post to which I've come full circle to (>>15909975
) since this post is mostly restating things including the initial post.
I suppose since theres no way to verify either hypothesis, I will say that when considering the plausability of something in absence of any method of verifying it I consider how much it conflicts with present knowledge of things. This is different from things that can actually be observed obviously.