Hi paddo.
I wasn't going to reply because of time constraints, but your overzealous, simplistic and in many ways misleading repetition of your 'layman understandings' is confusing what is being argued and what is not being argued; and your failure to think deeply about what I wrote, and the subtleties involved in the reality rather than the theory, is what leads to the confusion. I will take time that I don't really have to spare, in order to point out some facile and misleading statements/understandings on your part:
It seems I am the one that you are finding difficult to understand.....
OK.....
What happens when I drop a clock into a black hole?
According to Einstein's theory of general relativity, massive objects create distortions in space and time. Near a black hole, these distortions become so strong that time behaves in unexpected ways.
Imagine that we are on a spaceship near a black hole. We drop a clock into the black hole and compare its time to that of our onboard clock. The falling clock runs progressively slower. It never crosses the event horizon, but stays frozen there in space and time. The falling clock also becomes continuously redder, since its light loses energy as it escapes from the black hole's vicinity.
By contrast, if we were falling with the clock, time would appear to behave perfectly normally. We would see no slowdown as we approached the event horizon. We would cross the horizon without any perceptible change, and our color would not appear to change. This is the principle of relativity: things can appear different depending on whether you are moving or standing still.
http://hubblesite.org/explore_astronomy/black_holes/encyc_mod3_q15.html
and the above is all I have ever claimed....
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole
Black holes exist (but not the alleged 'central singularity' aspect, which is very arguable from many perspectives, especially the Quantum energy-space processes/phase changes perspectives). So please don't keep confusing me with someone who denies BHs exist, ok?
Don't keep conflating the radiation IMAGE of the clock with the BODY of the clock itself. The IMAGE may be perceived or not remotely as it approaches the EH, but the clock BODY ITSELF will NOT be seen (I will explain this below) as it continues as I said INTO the EH. Ok?
The accepted 'time dilation' effect at the EH is MAXIMUM and hence NO PROCESSES actually occur WITHIN the BODY of the clock; and that includes all ELECTRO-MAGNETIC processes which would otherwise 'emit' the photons whether 'red' or otherwise. So once the clock body and internal processes nears/reaches the EH, all 'timing' and 'radiating' processes STOP for the CLOCK INTERNALLY....
HOWEVER, the clock ITSELF will MOVE along a space trajectory as an INTERNALLY 'stopped clock' still falling towards/through the EH. Understand? The clock as a whole still MOVES FORWARDS across energy-space PATH and into the EH even while its INTERNAL oscillatory 'timing/radiation' etc processes are NO LONGER POSSIBLE
(since the only 'degrees of freedom' left to the clock internally and externally is that ONE-WAY path across the EH, with none left over for internal processes since no internal component parts can move/oscillate within in any other direction except FORWARD direction which the whole clock is forced to move, into the EH). Ok?
See the subtleties and the realities actually involved, as distinct from the facile and crude 'descriptions/understandings' of same which you repeat but are not the points I made in order to get all thinking more realistically to avoid those usual cross-purpose 'set piece' arguments/exchanges which lead nowhere but misunderstandings ON BOTH 'sides' when 'space-TIME' abstractions reach their 'use by' date when further SUBTLE aspects have to be considered as I pointed out?
Here's where we disagree undefined.
As illustrated in both articles I supplied earlier, from that FoR of the clock falling in, I don't believe the clock has stopped.
I'm putting my neck on the block here [cheers I hear coming from the peanut gallery], but I don't believe there is any FoR [outside the EH] including the clock's FoR, that sees time as stopped.
Again, the clock BODY has NOT stopped moving into the EH, only the INTERNAL oscillatory (ie, timing' and 'radiation-emission etc) processes have stopped (the latter because the time dilation factor allows no degrees of freedom for anything other than FORWARD MOTION ONLY through/along the energy-space PATH into the EH).
So any 'radiation' from such a 'time frozen' clock is NOT possible, hence no 'observer' will ever see any radiation IMAGE FROM the clock once it is so close to the EH. See? The PHOTONIC IMAGE is NOT GENERATED/EMITTED at all!...while the now DARK and FROZEN, ie, NON-'radiating' and NON-'timing' and altogether NON-'internally processing' etc, clock body itself continues into the EH (as you and I both agree already).
!
Just thought of a FoR where time does stop [or is non existent] From the FoR of the photons of light themselves?
I mean from the photons FoR, it can go from one side of the Universe to the other in an instant!
I already had occasion some time back to explain to others the subtleties involved there also. The photon is a packet of oscillatory perturbations in a pre-existing electro-magnetic 'field' (which is component range/part of the overall composite 'field' of the universal energy-space as a whole). Hence there IS a 'timing' process going on, OR THE PHOTON would not move or propagate at all across energy-space (ie along the e-m 'field' component). See?
The PHOTON feature 'timing processes' subsist IN THE underlying E-M FIELD in which it is oscillating/moving along, but only ONCE a photon IS 'emitted'. In this context of near-event-horizon TIME DILATION/FREEZING aspect, we can see that IF our normal clock's INTERNAL processes are frozen/stopped, then there will BE NO photon TO move away or be seen remotely, and hence there will BE NO 'time' aspect TO invoke via the E-M field, simply because the frozen clock CANNOT generate/emit a photon!....and hence NO E-M field 'timing processes for the propagation never comes into play for that non-emitted photon!
Anyhow mate, I can't go into it more than I have already. But I trust you will have got the point about the SUBTLETIES which you miss and make assumptions about certain parts of the quantum process/energy-space translation aspects which are either different from what you facilely 'understand', or are not there at all. Think about it all again as I suggested, and then maybe also curb your overzealous enthusiasm for repeating conventional but not complete understandings of what is actually going on in reality (as distinct from the conventional abstractions of same using the 'space-TIME' construct rather than the 'space-MOTION' or 'space-ENERGY' reality/processes).
Don't lose heart though, keep enthused, but try not to go 'over the top' with constant barrage of wiki-references etc which don't really address some of the subtleties being pointed out for FURTHER consideration in a different way, as I suggested above/earlier. Gotta go! Cheers and see/read you round, paddo, everyone!
