By AWT every theory, which is using more than single postulate (a nonzero rank implication tensor, be more specific) becomes inconsistent insintrically in less or more distant perspective, Peano algebra (K. Gödel, 1940) or general relativity (GR) is no exception. By [Kerr, Kerr & Ruth 1999, 621] textbook GR is using following postulates:

- Actions of inertia and gravity (i.e. the forces or even every inertial reference frame dependent observations) are indistinguishable each other - so called weak or strong equivalence principle.
- Four dimensional space-time is curved as a result of the presence of mass (mass-energy equivalence principle is apparently considered on background).
- Objects take the shortest path between two points in space-time, so called geodesics (principle of least action of Newtonian dynamics extended to 4D space-time).

Newtonian motivations of GR are collected here. General relativity is AdS-CFT dual to Einstein's original “refractive approach” to gravitational light-bending and various Varying Speed of Light theories (VSL), like quantum mechanics (QM), which represents exsintric perspective of relativity phenomena. Locally GR appears as a very general theory, if we consider energy spreading in transversal waves as the only source of information. Unfortunately, because strictly local and causal perspective is only idealized model of reality, every look into Universe future or history violates the GR undeniably. Although with compare to 2nd-order theories, like quantum gravity or string theory - this violation can be minimized to arbitrary low value by narrowing of observation scope by introduction of De Sitter background dependent Poincare group (Kerr or Cartan's geometry) and/or by introduction of tachyon interactions in hidden dimensions, usually done unconsciously by introduction of "implicit higher order effects" (extended GR of Heim, Yilmaz or Bekenstein). In addition, we should distinguish an inconsistency of GR postulates from inconsistencies of its formal theorems, which are often using an additional approximations on background (for example by ignorance of mass-energy equivalence principle at the case of Einstein's field equations).

The most classical example of above inconsistency is gravitational lensing, which is manifestation of quantum uncertainty, as it splits result of remote object observation into odd number of images. Whereas GR is strictly causal theory in 4D spacetime, it doesn't allow any manifestation of quantum uncertainty or Lorentz symmetry violation, until additional time dimensions are included. This inconsistency manifest most pronouncedly in cosmological constant problem, because prediction of cosmological constant by GR differs from those of QM in two hundred orders of magnitude, thus violating correspondence of GR and QM.

Another source of inconsistencies is local character of equivalence principle. The inertial and gravity action can be always distinguished, if we consider 4D space-time only. Because every gravitating body inside of observable Universe must be of finite size and therefore it has always a center of mass, we can always distinguish a gravity action from acceleration by usage of pair of plummets at nonzero distance. The acceleration force resulting from omni-directional space-time collapse or expansion considers higher dimensions though, so it can exhibit a center of action. By AWT the gravitational field of massive object can be interpreted as a acceleration force, resulting from inhomogeneity in omni-directional Universe expansion. Therefore GR appears OK, only if we consider additional dimensions, thus violating 4D causality again. Here we can read about Kipp Thorne's method to show that GR contradicts its own equivalence principle.

Due the extreme gradient of space-time curvature, the nonlocal character of equivalence is especially pronounced at Planck scale and at the case of black holes, where it manifests by various violations of GR from exsintric perspective. The classical Einstein's field equation suffers by additional inconsistency because of neglecting of mass-energy equivalence during its derivation. It leads into additional supersymmetric phenomena, like precession, Zeeman effect, fragmentation of event horizon and surface tension effects of gravity field gradient, by dark matter and Pioneer spacecraft anomaly in particular.

Limited speed of light and omnidirectional expansion of Universe itself is sufficient for explanation of Pioneer anomaly and Newton law violation. The acelleration of Pioneer anomally agrees well with predictions of MOND theory a = H.c = (8 +- 1)E-10 m/s^2, where H is Hubble law constant. Alternativelly we can consider it as a dragging effect of background CMB photon field, in AWT these explanations are dual mutually. This duality illustrates, how violation of gravitational law at spacecraft scale is related to violation of gravity at Casimir force scale. Because gravitational law remains violated by Casimir force at small distances only, such violation of Newton law for small acelleration means, equivalence principle is violated for general relativity, too.

While relativity bothers with insintric perspective only, it neglects the fact, gravity field inside of each gravitating body is zero, because of zero space-time curvature. Therefore every massive object exhibits an inflexion point of space-time curvature or gravity force at larger distance. Whereas by relativity highest curvature should appear exactly at the center, which leads to Schwartzchild's solution with black hole singularity at center, which is apparently unphysical, though. Kerr's solution is only partial improvement of this problem - it just uses toroidal symmetry of singularity instead of spherical one. We can see, requirement of zero gravity force at center of every gravitating object leads to requirement of weak repulsive gravitation force at distance and dark matter phenomena, which is manifestation of quantum gravity phenomena by its very nature. It's symptomatic for mainstream physics, whole generations of relativists didn't bother by this trivial and apparent paradox.

While the inertial properties of electron and positron are the very same, their behavior in gravitational field suffers by CP symmetry violation - the antiparticles are attracted by weaker force, then particles. Antineutrinos should be even expelled by gravity nearly completely because of their negative curvature. Axions could be even of negative mass, i.e. a product of tachyon condensation, being a solitons - they explode into photons when halted like vortex rings.

Concept of Feinberg's tachyons brings even deeper inconsistency into GR. In sense of classical GR gravity cannot affect itself, so that the gravity field cannot curve the path of gravitational waves. Because path of photons is curved, it would mean, gravitational waves would propagate like tachyons along shorter path, then it's allowed for photons in general, which is consistent with AWT, but not with GR by its classical, i.e. Einstein's formulation, while extended GR allows this by introduction of more general reference frame in hyperspace. As a strictly causal theory in 4D, general relativity doesn't allow a tachyons and/or gravitational geons without introduction of universe expansion into hyperspace, neither formation of gravitational waves, because no environment can generate waves by itself without presence of objects composed of / living in compacted dimensions, which could serve as a source of inertia. In GR such source could serve only gravitational geon, which is stabilized against its collapse by omni-directional expansion of space-time into hidden dimensions. We can see, general relativity requires concept of hidden dimensions on background to be able to work consistently by the same way, like quantum mechanics, which predicts expansion of all wave packets without gravity potential of Universe collapse.

From this perspective is interesting, Einstein refused the concept of both black holes, both gravitational waves obstinately (original source removed?), although he should know about necessity of omni-directional Universe expansion in relativity quite well, if he claimed his cosmological constant as a "*biggest blunder of his life*".