I'm not a physicist but it's interesting to think about the implications:

1. No singularity at the center of a black hole

2. Universe's expansion rate is not constant because it's blackholes powering it with matter

3. Eventually expansion slows, stops and reverses

And now my own crazy ideas:

1. Maybe the universe is a inside a black hole

2. Maybe the big bang was a result of the birth of another black hole somewhere else, and that the rapid expansion rate of the early universe was due to the a huge amount of matter converted into dark energy by this black hole

What gets a little mind bending for me is the idea that the physics inside the black hole can differ slightly from the ancestor universe. So black holes will preferentially create descendant universes that prefer to create more black holes.

This is a different multiverse theory than the quantum many worlds theory. The limitation of quantum many worlds is that the physics doesn't change. But in the ancestor black hole many worlds theory it does.

When you put these together, you can get an even larger multiverse, where anything that can happen does happen, but only if the laws of physics allow for black holes. That may mean the Marvel Cinematic Universe, is out there somewhere, so long as those laws of physics allow for black holes. Right? Again not a physicist.

I don’t think the black holes are the ones with the problem.

The universe started with a single Big Bang, but is maintained by an interrelated force continually applied that keeps allowing it to resist collapse, the resulting system allowing local minima such as Earth's sweet spot of smallish sun + gentle orbit.

It's almost like it was designed to be perfect, with nicely balancing counterforces, all set in a sea of brutal extrema, and all set to mathematically clockwork precision that is discoverable by intelligent inhabitants, whose bodies, themselves, operate under those same physical laws. Almost ;-)

Or maybe they already proved that black holes consume some dark matter but at a much lower rate to explained this.

I think this and JWST early galaxy findings mean we don't really understand gravity.

>> we don't really understand gravity

I would say that what we don't understand is how the universe is structurally layered, vibrationally/dimensionally. That 5/6ths of the matter is missing lines up with our physical dimension (of energy and matter) being only one of six onionish dimensional layers, all contained within the same 3-space.

The five dimensions are three of space (x,y,z), one of time (t), and one of dimensional vibration (?). That's the structure, but I have neither the maths nor the details to divine how everything is interrelated. All the dimensions' matter does combine to contribute to the inertia of the galaxies we can see.

What is particularly difficult is that we can only measure our dimension's matter & energy with our tools, which are, of course, made of our matter & energy. In specific high-energy experiments, however, we can get some crossover of, e.g., anti-particles appearing on our side of the "wall".

That's the structure, as far as I understand it. The rest will require much maths and experiments and exploring the unknown. That is what Einstein did to expand Newton's understanding. There's at least one more level-up needed to encompass our measured corner-case phenomena.

There are six total vibrational dimensions, inhabiting this same 3-space, with no direct physics-style interaction between them except (somehow?!) collectively contributing to the totality of inertia that keeps the galaxies from flying apart.

All I have are breadcrumbs, my friend, and some understanding of how it fits into our lives.