Wouldn't the opposite of the infinite be zero, rather than the finite?

Such that the frame with the longest ruler and fastest clock would be closest to the equilibrium of the vacuum, the unmoving void of absolute zero.

Then the finite would be the endless feedback between these two parameters.

What defines, limits. What limits, defines.

So space is not so much three dimensions, which are a mapping device, like longitude, latitude and altitude, but equilibrium and infinity.

Energy lost to entropy is replaced by energy radiating in from infinity.

As for Big Bang Theory, if space were to expand, why doesn't the speed of the light crossing it increase, in order to remain CONSTANT?

Instead they extract two metrics from the same light. One based on the speed and one based on the spectrum. If the speed were the numerator, it would be a tired light theory, but as an expanding space theory, the speed is still the explicit denominator.

One way light does redshift over distance, is as multi spectrum packets, as the higher frequencies dissipate faster. Though that would mean we are sampling a wave front and the quantification of light is an artifact of its detection and measurement.

Infinities beyond the Planck.