In 1934 Milne and McCrea [Quart. J. Math. 5 (1934) 73-80] made a startling discovery that still is not fully resolved. In Harrison's [Cosmology (Cambridge U. P., 2000), 2nd ed. p.326] words: "Why should Newtonian theory and general relativity, when applied to a uniform universe, yield identical results? At best, Newtonian theory is only approximately true, and yet in this most unlikely of all applications it gives the correct result." Milne and McCrea derived the Friedmann-Lemaitre equations for the expansion rate of the universe at zero pressure.
Cosmologists confuse first and second order phase transitions. They are, in fact, mutually exclusive. What is even worse is that if the early universe was expanding adiabatically, the product of the radius and temperature is an adiabatic invariant. In the two phase region the volume can be changed without changing the pressure. The pressure is a sole function of the temperature. The adiabatic condition destroys all this, and, hence, there can be no latent heat of condensation or evaporation.
In a paper on negative heat capacities [Mon. Not. R. ast. Soc. 181 (1977), 405-419] Lynden-Bell and Lynden-Bell claim that "All astronomers know that when a star or a star cluster loses energy its temperature will increase in accordance with the virial theorem. Beckenstein [sic] & Hawking have demonstrated that black holes display the same phenomenon. Thus astronomical systems display negative specific heat." Then all astronomers would be wrong.
It has long been observed that the pressure enters Einstein’s equations with the wrong sign. It would tend to increase the mass of a gravitating body rather than acting to oppose gravitational collapse. In other words, stellar equilibrium is maintained by an interior pressure that balances exactly the force of gravity, and, therefore, it cannot contribute to the mass it is trying to oppose from collapsing.
The Fabric of the Cosmos and The Hidden Reality: Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos are masterfully written tour de forces in incomprehensibility that clearly uncover the incongruities of general relativity, inflationary cosmology, and black hole thermodynamics. This is entirely consonant with Fred Hoyle’s observation that the establishment defends itself by “complicating everything to the point of incomprehensibility.”
It is invariably getting more difficult for physics journals to distinguish among new and original research, rubbish, and stuff that would make no difference if it remained unpublished. A good example of the latter is string theory. It is not very difficult for a physicist to hide behind a veil of heavy mathematical formalism or technical jargon. But the veil comes down when he attempts to convince the public at large that his scientific ideas hold water.