As far as I can see, there are no inconsistencies, and this is a coherent and selfconsistent examination of how the universe could work in an Open System,
according to the Laws of Thermodynamics.

Once a paradigm was set in place, that precluded examinations of any phenomena without examining it under both Open And Closed systems, (because obviously we can't know for sure yet, right?), then I would say that would be inconsistent.

But this has brought to light a very interesting Thing. All this time, the Big Bang has had 'space' expanding, and not diluting, which is 'space' making 'space', just making more of itself, and justified by saying, oh, that's okay, because the consevation laws don't have to be adhered to globally in GR. Sorry, but it would appear, that the expansion of the universe has been adhering to the Laws of Thermodynamics of an OPEN SYSTEM all along.

I will say this though. It is very probable that almost all of the conservation laws hold true, because according to the view in this paper, the openess of the universe is only at the MBH's, and it is probable that the only place the baryonic matter can be 'stripped' to its Planck 'base' element, is once it enters the event horizon and makes its way to the singularity therein. BUT, I am definitely not qualified to make that kind of determination.

OR, we could start with this...your choice.

[When a massive enough star ends its life in a Type II supernova, it creates a black hole, and GR has been used to model this event with a very high level of confidence, however in a Big Bang (BB) closed universe, the Laws of Black Hole Dynamics, expressly forbids the time reversal of this event, so currently, GR cannot even ‘see’ the progenitor (star), even though we know what it is. This is VERY strange! On the other hand, if you consider this, according to the Laws of Thermodynamics of an OPEN system, then there is no Law of Black Hole Dynamics that forbids this, and it is perfectly legal to do a time reversal, and bring the singularity up out of the black hole, past its event horizon, and very easily and naturally ‘see’ its progenitor, the star. It is also important to mention here
That the progenitor material, is spewed out (planetary nebula), while the black hole is separate, and defined by its event horizon, which begins accreting matter later.

So, what does this mean? If the universe is operating under the Laws Of Thermodynamics of an OPEN system, then the Second Law of Black Hole Dynamics does not apply, and when considering the creation of a SMBH, a Cosmic Black Hole, it is perfectly legal to do the time reversal I have shown to find the progenitor…the Naked Singularity (it’s not starting the universe) that makes a SMBH and ultimately its galaxy!]

__________________
RussT
________________________________
Everything is, as it should be, otherwise, it wouldn't be!