My question is: Is my picture of what happens as something approaches an event horizon accurate - and are there any citations describing it? I got my "picture" from a PBS broadcast several years ago. It was since mentioned in these forums, but I haven't been able to find an explicit mention of it in the literature accepted by this forum. The picture is this: First, an event horizon is dependent on a frame of reference. One object "Bob" can enter the event horizon of the reference frame of another object "Alice". I've seen what Bob sees described as "No Drama" - he simply sees his watch cross through some particular time, say noon, as he crosses the horizon. On the other hand, red shift and other effects prevent Alice from "seeing" much at all. But the events as described from her reference frame would be: 1) Bob's watch never reaches noon and Bob never reaches the event horizon. In Alice's universe, Bob's time slows almost to a stop. 2) Because of this "time freeze" and HUP, Bob's location cannot remain definite - and he begins to spread out over the event horizon. It's that last point that I'm having trouble with. When I try to find citable papers on how the issues resolved the bet (at least in the minds of Preskill and Hawkings), I find "Euclidean path integrals" with no mention of this "popular" explanation. Still, it makes sense that Bob cannot remain both stationary in time and fixed in space from Alice's reference frame. So I expect that Bob would take on an indefinite position - again, in Alice's reference frame. So what is the real scoop?