GR does not describe the interior topology of black holes, beyond predicting a singularity. Is there a hard boundary with no hair, or is there a [knotted or braided] fluidic attractor system with fluidic turbulence at the boundary?
SQR Superfluid Quantum Relativity seems to suggest that there is no hard event horizon boundary.
I don't understand how any model that lacks descriptions of phase states in BEC superfluids could sufficiently describe the magneto-hydro-thermo-gravito dynamics of a black hole system and things outside of it?
It is unclear whether mass/energy/information is actually drawn into a supermassive or a microscopic black hole; couldn't it be that things are only ever captured into attractor paths that are outside of the event horizon?
Does Hawking radiation disprove that black holes don't absorb mass/energy/information?
SQR Superfluid Quantum Relativity seems to suggest that there is no hard event horizon boundary.
I don't understand how any model that lacks descriptions of phase states in BEC superfluids could sufficiently describe the magneto-hydro-thermo-gravito dynamics of a black hole system and things outside of it?
It is unclear whether mass/energy/information is actually drawn into a supermassive or a microscopic black hole; couldn't it be that things are only ever captured into attractor paths that are outside of the event horizon?
Does Hawking radiation disprove that black holes don't absorb mass/energy/information?