bulletproof alternate universe

Yes. That's something we all can agree upon.That's sort of the whole point.

Oh, I was under the impression that the density is higher in a black hole.That is, the actual space was more compressed, but the particles stayed the same size.

But changing the speed of light in 'mid-flight' changes several of it's properties, such as it's freqency. Frequency is what determines what colour and such we see light as.

How does this affect the gravitational effect of the black hole, then? How do you measure how far from the center of gravity that an object outside the hole is?Why would a star that collapses into a black hole have a greater gravitational pull as a hole than as a star?

My previous impression was that since gravitational forces are dependant on the distance to the source, compressing something would mean that any external object or individual internal parts can be closer to all parts of whatever is causing the gravitational distortion.I haven't really spent much time on black holes, though.

But that would require fundamental changes in what the stars are made out of (most likely 'inventing' new types of atoms).Saying that "It magically changes to whatever we need." is not an useful model in any way. If you want us to take you serious, you'll need to actually provide something well thought over which actually says something specific. Otherwise you're just coming up with stuff as you go along.

Oh, I am very familiar with that formula. What I was suprised by was that you claim that the internal distances in a black hole isn't changed from it's non-hole state.To which I responded to say that the only way for something to have a higher centralized deformation due to gravity was if it occupied less space (as per the formula).So is or is not a black hole denser than the star it was 'made' from?

Just short checkup here... Are you at least slightly familiar with all of the following concepts?- Frequency
- Wavelenght
- Spectra from stars (based upon the elements within it)

Maybe we should illustrate this with numbers. When you change the speed of light, you automatically change what wavelenght a specific source sends out.It follows a very simple formula. wavelenght = speed of light / frequencyFor example, if we start with a lamp that sends out light at a constant frequency of 6.6*10^14ish Hertz.Normally, this corresponds to light with a wavelengt of 300000000/(6.6*10^14) = 454 nanometer. This is a rather nice deep blue light.If we suddenly increase the speed of light by even, say +50%, we get.A new light with a new wavelenght of 450000000/(6.6*10^14) = 682 nanometer. This is a rather nice bright red light.So the same source starts producing light with a different wavelenght. Note that the light already produced can't change it's wavelenght in mid-flight because that would require serious screwups both in energy conservation and the location of the beam.It would be required that the spiritual stars were made up of different atoms in order to give off a different frequency, and then somehow change into normal atoms during the shift. Unless you have a testable model for such radical changes, I suggest you drop it.

But you said that the spiritual universe would explain what we see today as having been formed by the exact same mechanisms as we can currently observe.Hence, if things were radically different in the spiritual universe, we'd notice because we'd see too much messed up stuff out in the universe.You will have to give us something substantial instead of saying "It magically was done exactly the way I wanted it to be. Isn't it convinient." because that's a totally useless way to deal with the problem.