Time is relative to space; thus your description of time is a description of relative or spatial time. There is also reference time, which can exist independently of space.
Forgive me but it is not clear to me what you mean by "time is relative to space" and what you mean by "reference time" Could you please rewrite or extend your comments.
2. Point N° 7: "And a ruler is a material object we use to compare and delimit a particular length, without M, space would be meaningless too, for there would be nothing to relate the sizes. For such reason space itself should be a material continuum even if there were no ponderable objects to refer".
Space could exist without M, but such space would be irrelevant from within the void because space serves to locate matter. Matter here is first of all a set of points. Points precede lengths. Points can be singular, referential. You seem to behave in an affine space (with length-like concepts) as if you were in a purely vector space (not relying on reference points).
Well, from my view space is made up of matter, therefore matter serves to locate matter. My view of space is as a material continuum which follows the laws of fluid mechanics. And I think that points do not precede length. A length is not constituted of points, but of infinitesimal lengths. This is so because a point is adimensional, that is, its length is zero. Therefore something that has a length cannot be constituted of things that do not have length.
3. Point N° 10: "In a similar way to the points of a circumference in which any arbitrarily chosen point can be the beginning of the circumference, in the same way occurs with the universe, the beginning or end is mere convention to delimit two major events".
The lesson in this illustration of a circumference seems to be that the universe has no beginning. I disagree.
A circumference is a derived notion, the underlying notions being the reference point and any relative point. Thus, the circumference is a set of points emerging from a reference point. The beginning of the circumference is the center. Thus, the lesson of your illustration is that the Beginning can give way to new entities of which He is not direct part.
The use of a circumference was just to try to express an analogy so the reader understand my ideas. Please do not take it literally. Sometimes it is hard to express what one feels and thinks because we all humans have different educational and social backgrounds and levels of sensations. For instance, 30 celcius degrees may be for you hot but for others not.
The main idea here is that what I did suggests that the universe has no beginning of time. If you do not agree with this I would be grateful if you let me know your arguments.
4. N° 12: "It follows that the universe must be infinite in extension". Here you say the universe is infinite. I agree because if our thinking allows us to perceive infinity, there could also be One with the ability to materialize what we merely aspire to reach. Power precedes intelligence.
Well in fact, I have followed the principle of induction to conclude that the universe must be infinite, but since, so far, I cannot prove it, I leave it as a fundamental problem to be solved. I think that it is more important to understand what we mean by "infinite".
5. N° 13: "From the previous reflections it follows that there is only one universe." There could be a spiritual universe next to a physical universe with no obvious link between the two universes.
In paragraph 13, I also said in parenthesis "or of whatever nature" this includes a spiritual universe. If a spiritual universe exists it must either interact or have some influence with the physical one, otherwise it would be meaningless for humans; and like the mathematical universe, it is just invented by my being. So, if one considers that a spiritual universe exists it must be part of the physical universe or viceversa, therefore there is only one universe, possibly made of two parts the physical and the spiritual. When you say "with no obvious link" you may be saying that the interaction is not simple and direct, that under certain requirements one can have access to the spiritual universe.
It is possible for a given entity to switch states without motion. Geometric conformations of molecules show the same molecule in different states. We cannot obtain one conformation from another conformation through motion. Such molecular states just happen to be. Therefore entities could switch states from one reality to the other without necessarily moving.
Yes, you are right if you conceive motion as an act of changing position of an object as time goes by. But in this case I am referring to the wider concept of movement or motion, i.e., as the act of changing, no matter if what changes is position or a state, or whatever.
Good luck in the contest