Thank you for deciphering my thoughts and then trying to reason in the same context. With regards to heavy raindrops, it is very interesting if we can quantify

Thank you for deciphering my thoughts and then trying to reason in the same context. With regards to heavy raindrops, it is very interesting if we can quantify this effect. For example, let's imagine that you are falling into a black hole with Schwarzschild radius of 200,000 ly, which is located between Milky Way and Andromeda galaxy, and there's no huge accretion disk on this black hole (let's imagine we're falling at 45° tilt to its equator and with zero angular momentum WRT its spin, but we can also imagine a non-rotating black hole with no accretion happening at all). We are at 1.1r. What's the energy flux due to heavy raindrops? What's the energy flux due to Hawking radiation escaping? While I don't expect you to do the math, and I did not, my common sense tells me that latter is "negligible" and former is "significant, but not something you can't realistically shield against". Do you happen to appraise it differently? Otherwise, it seems that we are able to enter the sufficiently large black hole as an outside observer. Then, I would expect that we would see the other stuff falling into the black hole in proximity with our own point of entry (entire stars even), and I expect that they will be somewhat blue shifted. Imagine a star which has fallen in this black hole at the same time as our observer, on a distance of 2 ly. We have at least 200,000 years before we hit the singularity to make observations. After 100,000 years we will observe that the star is only 1 ly away, which translates into 1/100,000 blue shift of that star towards the observer. I also don't immediately see why everything we see inside this black hole will be contracted to an extremely bright point. Maybe the "outside universe"'s light would? The light from other objects inside this Schwarzschild radius (which has not hit the singularity yet) should be propagated normally, with slight blue shift. Clouds developing a nose may be a thing. However, in no way they the nose can point towards the singularity, since the singularity (the center of mass) will literally be in the future, the 𝛕 axis pointing towards it. So the whole cloud will move in the direction of the center of mass with almost speed of light. This is how we will perceive it locally, of course. Now we are returning to information paradox and black hole evaporation. Here, we have Kruskal–Szekeres coordinates which allow us to describe precisely what happens when matter falls into a black hole, and this includes the Hawkins radiation pairs. As a layman, I see these holographic solutions of information paradox, at best, an example of explaining the black hole evolution while working in bad coordinates (the ones tied to us as an observer), and at worst a result of further confusion. Kruskal–Szekeres coordinates also have "time axis" which you have previously dismissed. My point is that nothing special happens in "our" coordinates, nothing special happens in the coordinates set inside the black hole, and nothing special happens with the observer which is freefalling into the black hole, so there is no case for information paradox other that information travelling through the event horizon. Maybe there is some sort of paradox of matter falling into singularity, but it is entirely unrelated to event horizon, a distinct phenomenon. In this fashion, it can't be used in explainations of black hole evaporation. > The interior of a universe-sized black hole is not compatible with life (or star formation). It is a very bold claim, but I wonder what happens with life which has just entered the universe-sized black hole, with sufficient shielding to survive it of course. How long does it have and what will affect the outcome? Same with pre-existing stars. If they still have some runway, then you can surely observe the scenario when object A falls in a black hole outside of observability by B, then B falls into another black hole, then black holes merge and with some luck, A and B are observable to each other. But even if they don't, it's not important since observability is not a function of life or stars, in my understanding it just means that two objects can interact, and some kind of objects (if just protons or quarks) should be possible inside the black hole. I don't claim that black hole equals cosmological horizon, I'm just imagining that they're the same with regards to the (absense of) information paradox. I imagine that a computation-intensive simulation involving the outside of black hole, the inside of black hole and how they evolve and interact with regards to coordinate translations may shed some light on how the black hole evaporation works, without any additional physics such as holographic surfaces. And the solution will probably not lose information at any point. It's just that there is no observer to whom the whole information is available at any point of the evolution. I'm sorry that while I have typed a lot of things, they're not in the direct coherence with your arguments, which, in time, were not in direct coherence with my previous point, so we are bound to zigzag.