... since the singularity is shrinking at an ever increasing rate, the matter that falls into the black hole never reaches the singularity.
but that matter that has passed through the event horizon, even though it never really "becomes" part of the singularity because it can never reach it, still contributes to the gravitational pull of the black hole and expands its event horizon accordingly.
so REALLY, in all practicality (or so i argue), a black hole's singularity is not only the infintismally small point "in the middle", but also all that distributed matter that is falling towards "the middle" that has passed through the event horizon.
just a thought about an interesting question.
mrpex
Space/Science » in reply to Does a black hole have to be a "singularity"?
Well, if you think about it...
