Now most of us have heard of black holes and how they (in the common knowledge I've come across) have mathematical properties that should make them tiny in comparison to the event horizon if not infinitely so from the fact that it's gravitational pull is so great that it trumps over the other forces keeping it from being defined 3-dimensional, but I have to ask," Why does it have to be so different from the common model of our other heavenly bodies?" I've looked at the possibilities of what a black hole must be since i was the age of nine and the more i learned about forces and the capabilities of atoms the more unlikely it seemed to be anything like the infinite speck that seems to cross the minds of the people I've come across.
I believe that black holes should be really called "black stars". This is because for all we have come across we have only encountered objects that are as big as they seem, such as stars, planets, and moons. I can even say for sure that the magnetic repulsion of each particle within the black hole would easily prevent the infinite speck from occurring to such an extent that the object would most likely stay the size of the star that caused it to occur in the first place. What i think happens is that at a certain gravitational pull the particles the black hole is trying to release just get pulled back in causing an energy crisis for the surface atoms. So, what they do is absorb the light(which is an energy which atoms can absorb) chemically to replace the energy it's losing to the inner atoms under the surface layer, resulting in what we understand as a black hole.
Now this is only speculation using the information I've gathered so far, and since I'm not able to test my hypothesis myself...Any feed-back, missing information i can use to improve the idea, and questions i may not have covered are all appreciated.
Sincerely,
Lectrion
