The Universe refers to an abstract concept. No one ever saw the universe, pointed to it and named it, thus the universe is an artificial concept. It is the manner of concept we label abstract or nesting (by analogy).
Some ancient Greek or Roman conceived of the concept 'cosmos' or 'universe' from his pool of words. Instead of a thought or an utterance such as, "all the stars and all the mountains, and all the oceans, and all the trees, and all the nations, and all the atoms" he conceived of the bright concept universe (or cosmos) and labelled it as such. Use of this word concept facilitated his understanding as well as his discourse. It is more efficient to simply think or utter 'universe' than to run through the list of all things.
The word universe is a nest of related concepts. Most of the concepts nested into the concept universe refer to real objects (nouns of reality), e.g. stars, gas clouds, rocks, trees. But one little nasty concept refers to nothing. We label that concept space. Space surrounds the stars and all objects of reality down to the atoms. And so this concept is assumed to the abstract concept universe. The universe is a binary conceptual system that relates something and nothing. Or in other words the universe resolves to a relation of space and matter.
Universe is a nesting of concepts most of which resolve to objects of reality
Space is a concept that has been the stumbling block of thinkers for thousands of years. And it is no different today. Today the 'anointed' mainstream scientists think that space is some sort of pseudo entity that can perform causal actions and/or undergo change effects. They fell in love with the Universe and Space. They turned it into the shape of a woman. They gave these concepts curves and a swelling belly. They even gave her fluid through which all these mystical sorts of waves and particles travel through. And they help themselves to everyone's money in order to 'prove' to everyone that space is this objective women. What a pathetic lot!
Some scientists think that the space undergoes a change effect around a star. The star curves space so that planets as well as light phenomenon can move around the star. But this is inconceivable. Space has no physical shape that can impart surface to surface causal action or undergo change effect. Space simply refers to nothing. There is no bounds to space. Space encloses all physical objects. But the scientists cover all their bases when faced with a critical analysis and rational thought. And they mask their loves with esoteric mathematics.
The scientists clearly confuse something that they cannot see (or understand) for the nothing that is space. And this mistake has gone viral for some scientists think that space is receding the bounds of the universe (like a belly swelling). It has gotten so bad that some wonder just what this space is receding into: Here is an example of mathematicians musing over the absurd notion that space is expanding:
. . . if space is expanding, into what is it expanding? Isn’t there somewhere that it spills over? The answer is no. (pp. 80 – 81) S. Hawking, A brief history of time, Bantam (1988)
The boundary condition of the universe is that it has no boundary.’ (p. 136) J. Heidmann, Cosmic Odyssey, trans. S. Mitton, Cambridge U.P. (1989).
Space cannot expand into space. Space cannot expand AT ALL. Space is that which lacks shape. No shape equals no boundary or that which is not bounded from immediate environment. Space has no length, width or height. Space is not an essence or a substance. Space is unable to be contained, discontinuous, intangible, indivisible. Space does not exist (it is not a noun of reality). Space has no qualities. There is nothing to love.
God did not create space. Space is the nothing that ensures (so to speak) that objects such as atoms, stars, rocks, etc are able to retain their shape and move. Without space motion would be inconceivable and impossible. Without space objects such as stars would not be able to form. Without space there would be a single continuous block of matter with no objects, no motion, no location, etc. Nothing is a very useful commodity of the universe (so to speak), nevertheless God did not create the nothing that is space. This is resolved via critical thinking and rational analysis.
To avoid ontological contradiction space cannot refer to halfway between something and nothing. Either space refers to nothing or it is something. There is no other possibility. And it is resolved as nothing.
So now was the Holy Spirit sent to the Universe?
Obviously He was not! This is an ontological contradiction. The Spirit cannot be sent to an abstract concept. No one ever saw an object and named it universe. A Greek conceptualized a universe to help him understand how all things relate to one another. The Universe is an idea. It has no shape or bounds. There was no Universe prior to some Greek conceiving of the concept. Right?
Was the Holy Spirit sent to Space?
Obviously He was not! Space resolves to nothing and the Spirit cannot be sent to nothing. God cannot even cross that which is boundless, or transcend that which resolves to nothing. The Spirit can only be sent to objects such as stars, and people.
Did God create space?
Obviously He did not. To state such is an ontological contradiction. The Holy Spirit cannot create space since space refers to a conceptual nothing. God creates something (syn. objects, substances, mediators, etc.). God is not a nihilist.
By eliminating universe and space from the list of real objects of existence all we are left with are stars, gas clouds, oceans, etc. So now my question is.
Was the Holy Spirit sent to mediate the formation of all the stars? Or was the Spirit sent to all the stars? I mean did God send His Spirit to all of the gazillions of stars of our conceptual universe??? I assume that He did not. Why? The stars form via natural physical mechanisms. God has no reason to send the Spirit to all the stars. My reading of Sacred Scripture indicates to me that the Spirit is only sent to mediate a supernatural phenomenon. The Spirit is sent on extraordinary occasions such as the Incarnation, the Baptism of Jesus, Pentecost, the Baptism of a child or adult, etc. The sending forth of the Spirit is an election. God does not send the Spirit on a caprice.
So now where in our conceptual universe was the Holy Spirit sent? What star did God choose to send His Spirit to. Isn't it obvious? Do I even need to answer this question? It is clearly described in the second verse of Genesis 1:2. God sent forth the Spirit to the Earth, and the Spirit miraculously changed the Earth, specifically her face (or surface) in the light-event. Never was there another star or planet like the Earth. No other star in the Universe has received the Spirit. The Earth is elect among gazillions.
You sent forth your Spirit, and they were created, and you renewed the face of the Earth. (Psalm 103)