>>12852185the speed of light does not decrease near a black hole. a distant observer sees a particle slowing down as it approaches the horizon, but in the rest frame of the particle, it happily continues moving across the horizon. similarly, in the rest frame of the infalling particle, its light cone stays open as ever, it’s just that once it’s across the horizon the future light cone is totally contained within the black hole. the cone only appears to shrink according to an outside observer so your argument here is wrong. also, the horizon is only a coordinate singularity and geodesics do not define a unique set of coordinates. so kruskal coordinates are perfectly as valid and there is no essential singularity at the horizon.
now, the idea that weird things happen at the horizon is a well known idea, called a firewall. it has nothing to do with classical GR effects however. it comes from quantum or stringy effects. people have thought about this. people have also thought about ER bridges in black holes, but there you are off too because without having some wacky initial conditions you can’t propagate signals through the throat so it doesn’t explain anything astrophysical black holes. ‘t Hooft has argued that the throat at best should be viewed as the GR way of expressing correlations on opposite sides of the horizon of one black hole; the correlation is quantum but the throat can be viewed as the GR interpretation of how those correlations are connected. that’s just ‘t Hooft’s idea though; not very mainstream
asymptotic darkness does not mean what you say it means. asymptotic darkness is more about the behavior of high energy particle collisions and the idea that at very high collision energies, black hole states as described by string theory are the dominant states, which is kind of obvious if you think about it. so don’t misuse terms
anyhow i think this is a reasonable post and not schizo, you just have a naiive understanding of GR
