That is a 7-hour video.

Part-4 is the only part I tried watching…

There seem to be some wrong-assumptions in the theory that that video/paper is believing…

1. the area of an event-horizon can only increase, falsified by Hawking radiation, probably later.

2. the area of the event-horizons of 2 merging black-holes is greater after the merge than it was before, well, no, if black-holes can dissipate many solar-masses of energy while merging, through gravity-waves … then that’d reduce the size of their event-horizons, wouldn’t it?

3. the temperature of the black-hole is zero, because energy can’t get out past the event-horizon… to me seems backwards: if heat can’t escape, then it must be trapped, inside, right? Which would make it hot, not cold. Except that now one has to differentiate between the “perfect” black-hole with infinitesimal size, in contrast to a string-star, which definitely has size, which is slightly less than the event-horizon, from what I’d read… & you get the same kind of screwballery with stars having a surface-temperature of 10k K, or something like that, but then the temperature in the next outer layer is measured in millions of degrees, because the “temperature” in the surface is being immobilized by magnetic-fields, so it’s profoundly-mis-representing the real energy-density of the stuff in that layer…

The same seems to be happening in black-holes: gravity is keeping things “cold” when the heat can’t escape ( think! everything that comes in, slams-in at full speed-of-light: that’s HEAT, there! not just a sane amount, but insane! )

Which may actually monkey the definition of “temperature” in both cases…

I’m not watching the rest of that video right now: later, someday.

The mismatch between their simplifications, though, & what the system-itself seems to require, looks … wrong.

Always presume that the mistake is mine, not anyone-else’s.

I can’t do the calculus, they can.

_ /\ _