Has anyone considered that black holes may be defects in the model? There's an old phrase, "the map is not the territory". Some old maps show the edge of the world with giant sea monsters & ships falling off the ocean.
Einstein originally thought that black holes were simply an mathematical artifact, and not possible in reality.
Since then, we have observed objects that look a lot like we would expect black holes to look. There are theories, such as this one, that describe those objects as something different than what GR proposes, but thus far no testable prediction has contradicted GR's version.
Part of the problem is that many of the differences are about the interior of the event horizon. At least under GR's model, such differences are nit observable, even in principle.
More like a half-baked elementary school science project.
Consider:
* Lazy evaluation was used to reduce computational costs. Unless an event is observed, it never collapses into reality. Cannot use up all household's hyper-electricity supply, parents will be mad.
* Make GR and QM work nicely together? Nah, too hard, the show-and-tell is tomorrow morning.
* Intelligent beings on multiple planets? Just a single planet will do for a C, maybe a C+. And no time left to make them interestingly different anyway.
Be ready, once the project grade is announced, this simulation will just blink out of existence. Hyper-CPU power will be needed for billions of years (our time) of hyper-Minecraft.
