Any comments on the following description from Kip Thorne, BLACK HOLES AND TIME WARPS, 1994, Box 10.1 would be appreciated. It seems odd to me that at some given curvature, gravity would become self sustaining...if that is what he is saying.
We have previously discussed in these forums that the current causal event horizon is affected by any future growth of the black hole.... and the causal event horizon grows in anticipation or a BH merger or in-falling mass-energy. Can those effects be reconciled with the above description or do you think Thorne's 'quiescent' discussion is too simple to account for any accretion?? [that's my take]...When spacetime curvature is weak [as in the solar system].... [gravity] is weak....Einsteins general relativistic laws predict the curvature ...of BH and at the Big Bang.. should be among the most non linear phenomena in the Universe....as yet we possess almost no experimental or observational data to show us the effects of gravitational non linearity [GNL] and we are so inept at solving Einsteins equation that our solutions have taught us about the non linearity only in simple situations...for example around a quiescent spinning BH.
A quiescent BH owes its existence to gravitational non linearity [GNL]; without the GNL the hole could not hold itself together just as without gaseous non linearities the great red spot on the plant Jupiter could not hold itself together. When the imploding star that creates a BH disappears through the hole's horizon the star loses it ability to influence the hole in any way; most important, the star's gravity can no longer hold the hole together. The hole then continues to exist solely because of GNL without the aid of the star and the self generated curvature acts as a nonlinear glue to bind itself together.