That one is for a non rotating black hole, isn't it?

A Schwarzschild black hole.

Or can you use it for rotating black hole too?

And it's also a geometrical analogue to the mathematics generated, describing its properties, as I gather, would you agree to that?

=

The point is that I'm not sure how exact this sort of description is? For example it defines a 'singularity's center' to be 'stretched out infinitely', but how well would such a notion fit a real measurement outside a event horizon? Could I then expect 'gravity' to not point to a 'center' at all? Of the 'sphere' described by the event horizon, as I'm observing something in a free fall towards it?

(me at rest with the event horizon) Somehow, as I'm free to choose any point of entry that exist for that sphere, redefining that axle of infinite 'center', by choosing a different approach it seems to me that this definition speaks of the whole inside as being the singularity's 'center'?

And that seems to say that you must meet 'the center' as soon as you pass that event horizon?

Its weird, on the other hand, all singularities are weird

=

on the other hand this description also define it as the space inside (formerly time) also will become 'infinite'? So we have a infinite space, containing a infinite center then? Awhhh