To a traveler
moving at these speeds time would dilate to somewhere around
500,000,000yrs for the traveling inertial frame, for every second, of
the rest inertial frame.
Given that scientist have recently estimated the age of the universe
to be around 13-14 billion years old, that would make the age of the
universe to the rest inertial frame about 30 seconds (once again just
estimating). Which seems to me what you would expect to observe if
you where watching any powerful explosion in the void of space. Or to
put it another way, if it where possible to view the entirety of the
universes light cone from an outside perspective. The observer would
note that the whole thing was over in a mater of seconds.
Is there any validity to this line of thought? If there is not, might
I ask why not? I welcome all input on the subject. Once again I
apologize for my ignorance, but an answer on this subject would allow
me to quit thinking about it. That, I would appreciate immensely.

A couple of things. First, Einstein said that time dilation was
relative. It was not really possible to tell who was moving fast and
who was sitting still.

However, leaving this rather confusing paradox aside, the big problem
with your argument is that time moves SLOWER for the traveling frame,
not faster. You have your numbers exactly reversed (I didn't do the
math, I'll take your word for it). For every second that passes in
the traveling frame, a very long time would pass in the rest frame.
This makes the universe very much OLDER in the rest frame, not
younger.