[lean bean]

I'm sorry but I don't understand what you wrote here. Please rephrase for clarification for me. Thank you.

Maybe I was taking your wording too literally…
Pmb

However one can look at a black hole as a collapsed star whose matter never makes it into the event horizon because it gets frozen just at or outside the event horizon, as the link I providewd above suggests.

Assuming a rotating black hole has an accretion disk from which matter spirals down, 'spiral inflow,’  to the horizon, my question…

If your saying matter never makes it into the event horizon and is ‘frozen’ at/outside the event horizon, then are we allowed to think any future or later matter that spirals down from the accretion disk will never be seen to reach the horizon but is accumulating at the end point of the spiral inflow near the horizon?
Thus, I suggested wouldn’t this make the shape of the black hole non-symmetrical?

But yes, I know in an in-faller’s frame he crosses the horizon without noticing anything special. It is only the distant observer who never ’sees’  the in-faller/matter  reaching the horizon. It was a flippant question.

[Pmb]

Assuming a rotating black hole has an accretion disk from which matter spirals down, 'spiral inflow,  to the horizon, my question…

If your saying matter never makes it into the event horizon and is ‘frozen’ at/outside the event horizon, then are we allowed to think any future or later matter that spirals down from the accretion disk will never be seen to reach the horizon but is accumulating at the end point of the spiral inflow near the horizon?

I’m not 100% certain of what ...end point of the spiral inflow near the horizon..
is but if it’s what I think it is then the answer to your question is yes.

Thus, I suggested wouldn’t this make the shape of the black hole non-symmetrical?

I’m not 100% certain about this either but I think the answer is no. I think that information like that gets lost when it falls into a black hole.

[yor_on]

Wonder how infalling matter is seen from a event horizon?

Assuming light to blueshift everything outside the event horizon should speed up, locally measured from the Event Horizon, and infalling mass should then seem to arrive, as good as, instantly. That is if it speed up, locally defined? You can also imagine yourself accelerating, to get that effect, which then close to light speed would mean, what? Just think of some other frames trajectory or geodesic, then accelerate, if now your local clock slows down relative a universe, will those geodesics mass move faster, as defined by you? It's also a question of your motion relative theirs naturally, but what I'm wondering about is how a local clock will define other frames motion, when close to 'c'.

If you think it will, is there a point where that trajectory or geodesic, for you accelerating, will seem to move ftl? It can't be , unless 'c' is wrongly defined. Because we define it locally. We can also assume a uniform motion, after such a 'final' acceleration. Will your clock still 'tick' slower relative other frames of reference, equivalent to your accelerating, or do you expect that local clock to become of one rhythm, same for all uniform (relative) motions?

First of all, there's degrees of hells here A relative motion it still must be, but you accelerated first, as close to 'c' as you could. So, what would you expect?

[Thibeinn]

I don't believe gravity is caused by a stream of particles, such as the hypothesized gravitons, streaming out of a celestial object such as a planet or singularity.  In the case of a singularity, they theoretically could not escape from it.

Perhaps gravity is caused by a stream of particles (gravitons) streaming into a celestrial object. In this way they could somehow carry things along with them toward the surface.  The problem with this tho is what happens to those particles (gravitons) once they reach the center of the object?  They don't seem to just pile up there as that would seem to produce a gravitational field of ever-increasing strength (unless motion of the particles is necessary for gravity).  However, I would think some other effect of there piling up there should be noticable (someday).  Maybe they pass right through each other at the center, continuing along their path, and are rendered unable to effect anti-gravity while they are passing through a stream of gravitons moving in the opposite direction which are producing gravity.

In the case of a singularity tho, the gravitons may be unable to escape and simply pile up after passing through the center.  Again, some effect of their piling up may be noticable (someday).  Another possibility is, they may not be affected by gravity in any way and simply continue on their way, thus escaping from the singularity.