What are you talking about? I just posted two of them. I have two predictions of general relativity, in the form of metrics, both of which are solutions of the EFE. What did you think I meant? No it's not. Yes, a metric does vaguely have something to do with measurements, in the sense that it appears in all expressions intented to predict physically measurable quantities, but what you say above doesn't exactly sum up what a metric is. If you really believe that then why do you keep talking about the speed of light being zero there, as if that was a quantity anyone could measure? No I haven't. The c I set to zero is an a priori constant in GR, equal to 299,792,458 m/s everywhere and at all times in the current metric system of units (effectively by definition since 1983). It's never zero. What evidence? You haven't thrown a clock into a black hole and you couldn't retrieve it if you had. This might be a silly question, but you *are* aware that the Kruskal metric makes exactly the same predictions as the Schwarzschild metric does in these cases, right? In particular the Kruskal solution also predicts that a clock sitting on the event horizon will freeze (because its moving at the speed of light), just like the Schwarzschild solution does. It's only clocks falling past the event horizon that don't stop. No it's not close enough. These are two completely different situations. Like with simultaneity, the time clocks accumulate is already dependent on the path they take in special relativity. There is absolutely no reason that because a clock sitting on the event horizon freezes, that one falling past it should too. You can't dismiss the Kruskal solution on those grounds because 1) it doesn't predict that a clock crossing the event horizon stops, and 2) you apparently believe the Schwarzschild chart does predict that and you aren't using it as an argument against the Schwarzschild chart. Do you really need any more convincing the Schwarzschild coordinates blow up on the event horizon? That term that diverges isn't even associated with t. This one's associated with the radial coordinate. The local speed of light? As opposed to what? Some fictional speed of light that nobody actually measures? What are you talking about? It's been done. The Kruskal chart does effectively eliminate the infinities in the Schwarzschild metric, none of which are coordinate-independent quantities (so nothing physical is acually being changed). Where did I ever say you could?