[Paul25 (OP)]

Gravity aberrates (or disperses) time and space. To any observation of a black hole this has the effect of stretching space in such a way as to diminish the area of it's actual size to what appears to be the event horizon, like pulling over a blanket this also draws the background stars with it (to an observer).

Imagine a region of huge density surrounding an observer in half a sphere or a dome shape, if the region has sufficient density to form a black hole the region should contract to a much smaller event horizon around its axis, with the appearance of the background stars on the opposite side being stretched (aberrated or dispersed) across the dome side toward the area of greatest density due do gravitational lensing. You could call it a time/space funnel, due to gravity's effect on time the region has a slower rate of time relative to the other, a dipole arrangement. (See Dipole Repeller & Shapley Attractor)

In a black hole gravity's cumulative effect produces an escape velocity of c, the region could be said to have a rate of time of zero relative to an outside observers rate of time of 1. Within that region is another black hole where the rate of time could be said to be -1. There would be a band where the rate of time would be somewhere between these values outside the event horizon. Ok, so the numbers used are arbitrary as long as their proportions are maintained relative to each other and could stretch to infinity.  Alternately it could be thought of as a relativistic speed of 1c,2c,3c.., light speed has not actually been exceeded because these areas now are isolated causally. In such a way the shells are quantized. 

What is described is a temporal flip on the classical to quantum boundary, it's inverted equivalent is on the sub atomic scale, again where energy required approaches infinity. This is allowed for if charge and parity are also inverted to maintain symmetry. (See CPT symmetry)

The electromagnetic field of a particle is a dispersion in it's surrounding spacetime in the same way light is dispersed to produce a spectrum when passed through a prism, hence the parity between Newton's and Coulomb's laws. A particle has at it's poles a forward time opposing an inverted time converging in a field with a direction of flow known as the lines of force. Again a dipolar arrangement.

When particles meet at short range they will align themselves to the opposing field of its partner, positive time field of one particle contacts the inverted time field of the other particle(s). This creates a very strong coupling - the strong force.

On the edge of the universe matter is of a lower density producing less gravitational time dilation and hence a faster rate of time. This gives the appearance of an inflationary expansion relative to our reference frame of higher density. This matches observations of galaxies in low density regions which appear to orbit too fast and should fly apart. If you were in that region however, your time would appear to be normal but other regions of space (of higher density) would appear to be running too slowly. An observation is largely dependent on how much mass density is behind both the observer and observed for this effects the direction and magnitude of the flow of time which distorts a measurement.

As 2 black holes approach each other their event horizons would briefly reduce in radius before enveloping each other, essentially light is being pulled out of the event horizon since there is a change in the equilibrium of the gravitational field surrounding the black holes. During this phase some energy may be released from the event horizon. This example exaggerates the effect for the sake of clarity, but the 2nd object could actually be of a much lower mass for this to happen. If this process is inverted then you end up with the same action as electron excitation where the electron briefly goes up an energy level before dropping back down again and releasing the energy as photons.

Our universe consists of black holes one inside the other like a Russian doll and we exist on the thin boundary between them, the extended event horizon or photon sphere, only we don't see it that way due to the aberration. The rate of time is an infinite continuous expansion in either direction, inward and outward.

[Kryptid]

Imagine a region of huge density surrounding an observer in half a sphere or a dome shape, if the region has sufficient density to form a black hole the region should contract to a much smaller event horizon around its axis, with the appearance of the background stars on the opposite side being stretched (aberrated) across the dome side due do gravitational lensing.

If it collapsed into a black hole, it wouldn't retain its dome shape. It would become a sphere (or oblate spheroid if it was rotating).

[Paul25 (OP)]

Imagine a region of huge density surrounding an observer in half a sphere or a dome shape, if the region has sufficient density to form a black hole the region should contract to a much smaller event horizon around its axis, with the appearance of the background stars on the opposite side being stretched (aberrated) across the dome side due do gravitational lensing.

If it collapsed into a black hole, it wouldn't retain its dome shape. It would become a sphere (or oblate spheroid if it was rotating).

It was just an example to help conceptualize

[Kryptid]

If an event horizon is approached a quantized energy is released as the event horizon recedes. Particle accelerator collisons will always yield what looks like a recurring particle when what is happening is there is an ejection of energy from the event horizon

Particle accelerator collisions don't involve event horizons.

[Paul25 (OP)]

If an event horizon is approached a quantized energy is released as the event horizon recedes. Particle accelerator collisons will always yield what looks like a recurring particle when what is happening is there is an ejection of energy from the event horizon

Particle accelerator collisions don't involve event horizons.

If it involves a particle it also involves an event horizon

[puppypower]

The theory that light cannot escape a black hole has never been proven in the lab. What we can show in experiments is that wavelength will red shift, as energy leaves zones of gravity based  contracted space-time. Math is not 100% reliable since math can be used to prove the physics of game engines using virtual reality; infinite lives. Experiments are needed to separate the real from the virtual. Infinite lives will not show up under experimental conditions, even if the game engine math says on the computer screen. A good conceptual foundation supersedes math, since math is like a faithful horse that will obey even a poor conceptual or virtual master.

Is it possible the energy does leave a black hole, but that the energy has been so red shifted, we are not yet able to measure it? Our limitation in tools could create an illusion it cannot escape. Light cannot escape ,may be easier to say than our tools are not advanced enough to measure any extreme wavelengths approaching infinity.

This extreme black hole red shift theory, makes the boundary of the universe the speed of light times the age of the universe, away from the BB center. The speed of light is the same in all space-time references. It is not limited by inertial references or space-time expansion/contraction. The latter only affect wavelength, by not speed. The black hole is still part inertial reference, albeit close to a C equivalent.

The question that arises is, where does the extra energy go when photons are red shifted? If we red shift from gamma to radio waves, there is a large energy different between the initial and final state of the energy quanta. Energy conservation says we cannot create or destroy energy, rather it can only change state. What is the new state of the red sifted energy difference?

If the energy difference was 99,999% of the original photon leaving a black hole, then the black hole would retain the lion's share of this energy difference, as another phase. The current theory; energy cannot leave a black hole, mays still be a very good empirical approximation for what is going on. However, good enough may not be the best conceptual foundation to answer the topic question. If near infinite wavelength photons can escape, these will be the pioneer photons for opening of new boundaries in space-time. 

[Paul25 (OP)]

This extreme black hole red shift theory, makes the boundary of the universe the speed of light times the age of the universe, away from the BB center. The speed of light is the same in all space-time references. It is not limited by inertial references or space-time expansion/contraction. The latter only affect wavelength, by not speed. The black hole is still part inertial reference, albeit close to a C equivalent.

However the speed of time is not the same in all reference frames.

[Kryptid]

If it involves a particle it also involves an event horizon

Do you even know what an event horizon is?

The equations of gravitational time dilation imagines two clocks, one located an 'infinite distance' away from a gravitational field, there is no such a place

There is no need for a clock at such a location. The clocks can be at any two gravitational potentials and the equations can predict the relative rate of time between the two.

[Kryptid]

There is an event horizon for any mass, however small

The correct thing to say would be that there is a Schwarzschild radius for any mass. This is not the same as there being an event horizon for every mass. There is only an event horizon if the mass is contained within its Schwarzschild radius.

[Paul25 (OP)]

There is an event horizon for any mass, however small

The correct thing to say would be that there is a Schwarzschild radius for any mass. This is not the same as there being an event horizon for every mass. There is only an event horizon if the mass is contained within its Schwarzschild radius.

Right you are. I just don't like that term because it implies if the radius is not achieved there is no gravitational effect on time.
The other thing about the Schwarzschild radius its it makes no allowance for the gravitational field surrounding the mass. If a mass is within the Schwarzschild radius and has an event horizon, if I put that mass within a much stronger gravitational field the event horizon should actually recede,

[Kryptid]

I just don't like that term because it implies if the radius is not achieved there is no gravitational effect on time.

It doesn't imply that. Gravitational time dilation will happen for a gravitational field of any strength.

if I put that mass within a much stronger gravitational field...

The only way you could do that would be if you put the object with an event horizon inside of another event horizon (a smaller black hole into a larger black hole). I once did some math and discovered that the gravitational potential energy for any given mass is identical at an event horizon regardless of the mass of the black hole.

[Paul25 (OP)]

if I put that mass within a much stronger gravitational field...

The only way you could do that would be if you put the object with an event horizon inside of another event horizon (a smaller black hole into a larger black hole). I once did some math and discovered that the gravitational potential energy for any given mass is identical at an event horizon regardless of the mass of the black hole.

It was my poorly worded example. To put another way if a massive object were to approach a black hole the event horizon would have a lesser radius due to the change in equilibrium of gravitational potential. Or yet another example is if you flew in the opposite direction to a black hole the event horizon would increase in radius to that observer.
The gravitational potential energy for any given mass is identical at an event horizon regardless of the mass of the black hole simply because that is the radius where the escape velocity is equal to c relative to an observer.

[Paul25 (OP)]

There is an event horizon for any mass, however small

The correct thing to say would be that there is a Schwarzschild radius for any mass. This is not the same as there being an event horizon for every mass. There is only an event horizon if the mass is contained within its Schwarzschild radius.

The error in the Schwarzschild radius is that of a lack of a frame of reference.

[Kryptid]

The error in the Schwarzschild radius is that of a lack of a frame of reference.

The Schwarzschild radius is valid for any reference frame. For an observer in the same reference frame as the black hole (where the black hole appears stationary), the Schwarzschild radius would be as described by the standard equation used to calculate it. In a frame moving relative to the black hole, it would be length contracted.

[Paul25 (OP)]

The error in the Schwarzschild radius is that of a lack of a frame of reference.

The Schwarzschild radius is valid for any reference frame. For an observer in the same reference frame as the black hole (where the black hole appears stationary), the Schwarzschild radius would be as described by the standard equation used to calculate it. In a frame moving relative to the black hole, it would be length contracted.

If you were in the same reference frame as the black hole your time would also be dilated (relative to the earth say)  by the gravitational field, yes?
The black hole counts as an observer in itself, this is an extension of the 3 body problem.

[Kryptid]

If you were in the same reference frame as the black hole your time would also be dilated (relative to the earth say)  by the gravitational field, yes?

Yes, but that wouldn't change the Schwarszchild radius.

[Paul25 (OP)]

If you were in the same reference frame as the black hole your time would also be dilated (relative to the earth say)  by the gravitational field, yes?

Yes, but that wouldn't change the Schwarszchild radius.

By changing the flow of time any measurement of c (being distance/time) will be dependent on where the observation is made, the results obtained within that gravitational field will not match those 'at infinity' due to 2 observers disagreeing on the values of time and distance, they will agree on c but disagree as to the distance and length of time used to derive this value.
This makes the Schwarszchild radius observer dependent.

[Paul25 (OP)]

Wherever time is dilated then length must also be contracted to maintain a constant c. This results in the event horizon radius to reduce as it is approached. If you were falling into a black hole you would not notice, we are in fact falling into one right now!

[Kryptid]

we are in fact falling into one right now!

And where is this event horizon you speak of?

[Paul25 (OP)]

we are in fact falling into one right now!

And where is this event horizon you speak of?

Within the Shapely Attractor