Descriptive admissibility and boundary inference are examined at gravitational limits of black holes, implying new perspectives on black hole knowledge.
This paper applies SFM 2.1 to black holes as gravitational boundary structures. It does not claim to describe the black-hole interior, solve singularities, resolve the information paradox, or replace general relativity or quantum gravity. Instead, it asks a prior methodological question: before asking what exists inside a black hole, what descriptions remain admissible once external measurement, causal access, spacetime continuity, and ordinary object-language begin to fail? The paper treats black-hole knowledge as layered by admissibility: external measurement, boundary inference, mathematical continuation, constrained interior description, and breakdown marking. Using Persistence Fingerprint Analysis, Persistence Locking Mechanism, Admissibility Interrogation Topology, Recursive Continuity Geometry, and Lineal Continuity Traversal Mathematics, the paper separates what can be measured, inferred, mathematically continued, transformed, or halted. Core proposition:Before asking what exists inside a black hole, we must ask what descriptions remain admissible once external measurement, causal access, spacetime continuity, and ordinary object-language begin to fail.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A J Paton (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: