The Code wrote:(Time Frame) A quantifiable Segment of time that can be measured To a degree where different segments measure time in different aspects according to how close we get to the event horizon.
Sorry, that doesn't make much sense to me. In all likelihood, this is a concept that would need to be defined symbolically.
If time changes at all, (which they say it does)
It doesn't. All that changes is the relative
measurement of time between non-inertial frames.
How extreme does this go, past the event horizon ?
Our existing theories are not valid past the event horizon, so the question cannot be answered scientifically.
If your virtual particle is headed that way it could be deemed as going back in time ?
Many particles, virtual or otherwise, can be treated as traveling backwards in time. There is nothing mysterious about this. It comes down to how time is treated in the mathematics describing the theory.
(Breaks Laws) By this i mean GR-SR.
Again, you can't break a natural law. If our theory is incorrect, we may find cases where it doesn't apply, or in extreme examples, completely replace an old theory with a new one. But no natural law can be broken, or it wouldn't be a law.
It been known to not be explained by them or any understanding of the extreme things we see and can not be explained by using these laws.
We have no observations that contradict either GR or SR. There are a large number of independent observations that support their validity. It is certainly possible- even likely-that GR is an incomplete theory.
[quote="The Code"](Time Frame) A quantifiable Segment of time that can be measured To a degree where different segments measure time in different aspects according to how close we get to the event horizon.[/quote]
Sorry, that doesn't make much sense to me. In all likelihood, this is a concept that would need to be defined symbolically.
[quote]If time changes at all, (which they say it does)[/quote]
It doesn't. All that changes is the relative [i]measurement[/i] of time between non-inertial frames.
[quote]How extreme does this go, past the event horizon ?[/quote]
Our existing theories are not valid past the event horizon, so the question cannot be answered scientifically.
[quote]If your virtual particle is headed that way it could be deemed as going back in time ?[/quote]
Many particles, virtual or otherwise, can be treated as traveling backwards in time. There is nothing mysterious about this. It comes down to how time is treated in the mathematics describing the theory.
[quote](Breaks Laws) By this i mean GR-SR.[/quote]
Again, you can't break a natural law. If our theory is incorrect, we may find cases where it doesn't apply, or in extreme examples, completely replace an old theory with a new one. But no natural law can be broken, or it wouldn't be a law.
[quote]It been known to not be explained by them or any understanding of the extreme things we see and can not be explained by using these laws.[/quote]
We have no observations that contradict either GR or SR. There are a large number of independent observations that support their validity. It is certainly possible- even likely-that GR is an incomplete theory.