We extend the density matrix framework of the Cosmological Braking Theory (CBT) to the interior of Schwarzschild black holes. The fundamental equation ρ̈ = −2V′ (P) ρ on the Bures–Fisher–Rao manifold, combined with the identification XBH = rₛ/r as the black hole analogue of the CBT cosmological variable X = Ωf (1+z) ³, yields a description of the black hole interior without singularity. The horizon condition XBH = 1 at r = rₛ corresponds exactly to the CBT quantum rebound condition X = 1 at zc = 6. 539: the event horizon is structurally identical to the holographic temporal boundary of the cosmological sector. Inside the horizon (XBH > 1), the conformal factor Φ (r) = 1/D (XBH) decreases toward zero as r → 0, while the effective mass mₑff² (XBH) → −3κBH remains finite at the classical singularity. The equation of motion for δΦ is well-defined everywhere, including at r = 0. Three results follow. (1) The classical singularity is replaced by a state of maximal decoherence: Φ → 0 (zero conformal volume), mₑff² → −3κBH (finite tachyonic mass), SᵥN → Sₘax (finite maximum entropy). The density matrix ρ (λ) evolves continuously through this state. (2) The Bogoliubov WKB calculation shows that the bounce at SᵥN = Sₘax is silent: the WKB integral diverges as x → xₘin = λₘin/rₛ, giving |βₖ|² ≈ exp (−1. 52×10⁶) ≈ 0 for a 10 M☉ black hole. Information is conserved in ρ (λ) but does not re-emerge as radiation. (3) A structural contrast emerges between the black hole interior and the cosmological sector: at zc = 6. 539, mₑff² = 0 exactly, making the cosmological BKT rebound traversable in both directions of internal time λ — admitting an anti-universe on the λ < λc side. Inside a black hole, the effective potential grows as 1/x³, creating an impenetrable WKB barrier. Black holes do not spawn universes in the CBT framework: the Smolin conjecture is incompatible with this approach. All results use α = 1/137 with no free parameter beyond the black hole mass M. The Schwarzschild metric is used as input; a derivation of the interior metric from the EOM alone remains as future work.
François-Xavier Cerniac (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: