>>11849819All alleged Black Hole models pertain to a universe that's spatially infinite, is eternal, contains only one mass, is not expanding, and is asymptotically flat or asymptotically not flat.
But the alleged Big Bang cosmology pertains to a universe that's spatially finite (one case) or spatially infinite (two different cases), is of finite age, contains radiation and many masses including multiple black holes (some of which are supposedly primordial), is expanding, and is not asymptotically anything.
Thus black holes and the big bang contradict one another - they're mutually exclusive. This is undeniable and clear as day. It's surprisingly easy to prove that neither General Relativity nor Newton's theory predict black holes to exist.
Despite numerous claims for black holes in their millions, none has ever been discovered. It's also not difficult to prove General Relativity violates the usual conservation of energy and momentum. There are fundamental contradictions contained in black hole theory, big bang cosmology, as well as in General Relativity. Numerical methods are therefore meaningless.
Oh and for those who'd like to use the defense that in an expanding universe energy isn't conserved and thus the "energy conservation law" is false and therefore all criticism of Einstein's field equations are incorrect, friendly reminder to you that Einstein required his field equations to satisfy the usual conservation of energy and momentum.
To do so he introduced his pseudotensor which has been demonstrated to be entirely meaningless – see:
https://z.zz.ht/98S5i.pdf and related:
https://z.zz.ht/ZMeXe.pdfBig Bang theory is based upon Einstein’s field equations. Since the field equations violate the usual conservation laws, the theory of a big bang is fundamentally flawed.
