MigL

If you're going to generalize about certain groups, you had better ( at least ) specifically define those groups. Left/right or liberal/conservative can be vastly different from Democrat/Republican. While Democrats/Republicans favor well-defined policy issues, left/right, or liberal/conservative, are relative terms.

HaHa! GR doesn't prohibit singularities either. So by your argument, THERE ARE singularities ( or at least a valid theory of singularities ) within the EH ?

From the first page, Markus states "1. The overall metric must remain continuous and differentiable everywhere at the boundary 2. The new metric must itself be a valid solution to the field equations " IOW, you cannot have an abrupt change in the metric at the horizon. Exotic matter can be 'visualized' as the part of the virtual particle pair that gets swallowed by a BH, while the other part escapes to infinity and becomes real Hawking radiation. By the HUP, then, the BH has to lose the equivalent mass-energy while ingesting a virtual particle, so the exotic virtual particle is assigned a negative mass. Is this negative mass really negative, or simply an 'accounting' method ? Neither Newtonian gravity nor Gr predict 'negative 'mass. Tow more casualties of misinformation on the battlefield … You might want to pick up your wounded. I'm going for lunch.

I said I was done, but you keep providing ammunition for us to continue the battle. ( even though it may be pointless, as you don't seem to actually consider what anyone else says ) Agreed. We also have a mathematical model for the mechanism of their production, and interaction, which agrees very, very closely with those tests. Do you have a mechanism for the change-over to 'negative energy density' once an event horizon is established? Do you have a mechanism or model for the resultant antigravitational interaction? This is obviously not the negative pressure/cosmological constant model, as that has its basis on false zero point vacuum energy, so, if/when you come up with a mathematically self-consistent model ( as QFT, and GR, is ), people might start to take you seriously. So is galaxy formation ( top down and bottom up models, simplest of which is Lambda-CDM ) And since the central BH contributes directly to galaxy formation, it is no wonder there are still some unanswered questions. But that is no reason to go on a 'flight of fancy', and propose 'magic' happens at the event horizon.

I really don't wish to pursue this any further, as you seem to ignore the valid objections to your idea, and just keep repeating it over and over without adding any convincing value. I'll be blunt. The arguments presented against your idea by Markus have a sound mathematical basis. The arguments you presented for, are basically "We don't have observational evidence, so my 'fantasy' is just as valid as your math." IOW, you just pulled it out of your ass. t adding

I'm not aware of any problem with using Newtonian gravity for Mars' orbit ( very good approximation to GR at that distance out of the gravity well ), other than corrections for the perturbations due to other planets ( multiple body problems ). Do you maybe mean Mercury ???? And what does it have to do with Black Holes and exotic matter ?

I have never jumped off a building in China, as I've never been there. Yet the math guides me, and I know I'll be accelerating at 9.8m/s/s downwards, until I hit the ground with a loud 'THUD".

Is it ? These supermassive Black Holes were formed billions of years ago. WE can see them far away ( in the early Universe ) as QUASARs, that shine with the brilliance of thousands of galaxies put together ( 10 to 100 000 times brighter than the Milky way ). IOW, the accretion discs of the central BHs are HUUUGE, and probably involve large numbers of infalling stars and gas clouds. I don't see that needing an alternate explanation.

As Marcus has explained ( numerous times ) the exterior metric has to 'butt up' seamlessly to the interior metric. This condition constrains what kind of changes can happen at the event horizon; there can be no abrupt changes to the metric at the event horizon. Furthermore, Markus uses the fact that the metric can only change 'smoothly' to make predictions as you venture further inside the event horizon. The abrupt changes you propose simply cannot happen, according to GR, until GR reaches the point where it is no longer applicable. IOW, at that point it's anybody's guess, but understand that only happens close to the 'predicted' ( but not expected ) singularity. This is what I previously posted. Markus uses the math to guide his beliefs about the interior of the EH. While you say 'IF' this condition, "THEN' this happens; total WAG.

I miss AJB...

The OP said chemical reaction, but nonetheless I found this interesting, and so I thought I'd share it. A typical thermonuclear bomb uses a fission reaction to generate ( radiation carries momentum and impinges force on 'surfaces' ) pressure high enough to initiate fusion of the Lithium Deuteride fuel. In the classic Teller-Ulam configuration two stages of U238 are used for compression. The Ivy Mike test bomb of 1952, produced a combined ( two stage ) x-ray/gamma ray pressure of approx. 73 million bar ( atmospheres) In modern configurations, such as the W-80 cruise missile warhead, a spherical fissile compression is used. The radiation pressure generated on the fusible fuel, in the W-80 modern warhead, is approx. 1400 million bar ( atmospheres ). Explains how the sun's thermonuclear reactions can resist the immense gravity of the sun, and keep it from collapsing.

Wiki is always a good place to start https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment And this excerpt from the above link should explain "An important version of this experiment involves single particles (or waves—for consistency, they are called particles here). Sending particles through a double-slit apparatus one at a time results in single particles appearing on the screen, as expected. Remarkably, however, an interference pattern emerges when these particles are allowed to build up one by one (see the adjacent image). This demonstrates the wave–particle duality, which states that all matter exhibits both wave and particle properties: the particle is measured as a single pulse at a single position, while the wave describes the probability of absorbing the particle at a specific place on the screen.[26] This phenomenon has been shown to occur with photons, electrons, atoms and even some molecules, including buckyballs.[27][28][29][30][31] So experiments with electrons add confirmatory evidence to the view that electrons, protons, neutrons, and even larger entities that are ordinarily called particles nevertheless have their own wave nature and even a wavelength (related to their momentum)." When these single particle detections are taken multiple times, either at different time, or at different locations, and then overlaid, an interference pattern is evident, exactly the same as firing multiple quantum particles at the same time. I still remember being amazedwhen I first learned of this.

Interesting discussion. On the one hand, you have Markus' predictive math ( except for the singular region ) arguments. On the other, muruep00's arguments, with an awful lot of 'ifs" . Hard to decide who to agree with. ( no, not at all )

Do you think that's air you're breathing ? Or just 'anomalies' in the way moving wings stay aloft, or balloons get inflated ? I've never seen a photograph of air either, but I can take photos of the effect it has on things. I may not be able to photograph a BH directly, as there are no photons from it to be captured by the CCD ( or CMOS ) in my camera, but perhaps you know of something else that can bend light at the extreme angles ( you can see the accretion disk behind the BH ) displayed in those photographs. White Holes were first proposed by I Novikov in the 60s, as a possible solution to the EFEs for the maximally extended ( no edges ) Shwarzschild metric, along with 'eternal' BHs, with no charge or rotation, such that every BH has a white hole in its past. So GR does allow for them. However, you will note that this does not realistically describe BHs. All are thought to be rotating, and none are eternal, since we know the mechanism for their formation ( gravitational collapse ). Incidentally, there is no known mechanism for forming a white hole.

Theory aside, we have observational evidence for Black Holes ( photographs even ); we have none for 'white' holes.

Azide is used to catalyze an Organophosphine reaction. It is added as a powder through an N2 purged hopper to an intermediate, or solvent, carrier liquid. It is quite sticky, and one time someone had the bright idea to clean it off surfaces with steam. A little Azide was left stuck on the inner surface of an 8 Inch, stainless steel ball valve. When it decomposed at about 90 deg, it created enough pressure to rip the ball out of the valve housing, send it flying, and deform the 8 in SS ball into a football shape ( American football, for you Brits ) Tchnically not an explosive ( has other uses ) but still quite dangerous.

Azides, solids containing a lot of Nitrogen, seem to fit the bill. Their most common use is automotive air-bags.

Or if D Trump has his crony at the USPS remove postal boxes to stop mail-in voting. And sorting machines to slow down mail delivery, so votes don't get counted in time. All the while protesting that mail-in votes lead to election fraud, but requesting mail-in ballots for himself and wife. The beginning of the end for D Trump's Presidency. Former Republican Governor John Kasich was a teleconferenced speaker at the Democratic Convention yesterday. Indicating that these are certainly NOT normal times, he said "America is at a crossroads" And that being a life-long Republican "holds second place to my responsibility to my country". Several other Republicans or former Republicans, also spoke. https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/other/republicans-speak-at-democratic-convention-donald-trump-has-no-clue/ar-BB1855gm?ocid=msedgntp It's about time that ( at least some ) Republicans placed country above party.

More pertinent is what would they have to gain by actively hiding themselves. You realise we sent out Voyager1 into interstellar space with a gold record with 'greetings' to extra-terrestrial civilizations ? IOW, one meant to be seen by aliens. Aliens who could then 'backtrack' Voyager's journey and easily find Earth.

Corollary to this... Theories are not reality; They just describe (some aspects of ) reality. Models, not the 'real thing'.

You need to make very explicit your definition of 'liberal' and 'conservative'; I assume you mean Republican and Democrat, Dim. If you take the literal definition of 'liberal, you would need to include socialist ,and even communist, as far left extensions of liberalism ( just as fascism is a far right extension of conservatism ). And I assure you, socialist and communist regimes have built moats. Some have even built 'iron curtains' or walls.

You still don't get it... If an electric and magnetic field are needed to hold this 'mathematical' structure together, then, an electric or magnetic field can break that structure. What would result ?

It might seem like everyone is 'ganging up' on you, but this is an important point. Anything that has 'structure' has to have 'something' holding that structure together. That same 'something' should, then, be able to render that structure asunder. IOW, they cannot be fundamental.

The Laws of thermodynamics had a 'gambling' analogy. You can't win. You can't break even. The third was... And you can't get out of the game.

Then they are no longer 'elementary' or fundamental. Which means they can be broken down into their constituents. Even your 'positrin' and 'negatrin' have constituent charges and currents. If you are basically going to 'replace' all of modern Physics, and account for the implications of that replacement, you'll need a much better argument than you've presented so far.