The first assumption is that time can be accurately modeled as linear or cyclical. Inherent in that assumption is that it is neither just linear nor cyclical...but both simultaneously. I symbolize it as 10 or 01. Whether you're perceiving time as cyclical or linear depends on your perspective...but with that realization comes the understanding that the essence of time, from a "universal" perspective, will neither be cyclical nor linear...but a combination of both. Let's call it "universal time".
What got me on this path of questioning the nature of space was the way a lot of theories combine space and time as similar. That is, the properties of space and that of time tend to agree. Whether this is indeed the case, I don't know. But assuming that they do, then...
Your perception of space can also be influenced by your perspective.
There are two perspectives you can view space from...when you are in the system..and when you are out of it. The earth is a "space system"...and thus when you are in it you view it as something other than it's round nature. We'll call this "linear". And when you are out of it, you view it as round or "cyclical". So, in just the same way that time is 01/10, space is also 01/10.
(I'm not talking about cosmic space, but rather "physical" or "immediate" space.)
So, space can be thought of as both cyclical or linear....or rather the space system can be thought of as both flat or round.
And I think if you extrapolate from evolution a bit, you can reasonably prove that the earth can be modeled accurately as flat...using biology as a basis.
Just a thought.