The Continuum: The Interior of the Blackhole

The surface of a marble table is spread out in front of me. I can get from any one point on this table to any other point by passing continuously from one point to a "neighboring" one, and repeating this process a (large) number of times, or, in other words, by going from point to point without executing "jumps." I am sure the reader will appreciate with sufficient clearness what I mean here by "neighbouring" and by "jumps" (if he is not too pedantic). We express this property of the surface by describing the latter as a continuum.Albert Einstein p. 83 of his Relativity: The Special and the General Theory

How is it that time could have been a emergent process knowing full well that the measure, and the continued "half measure" we loose perspective on that space. So given the nature of the blackhole, how is it we see such smoothness geometrically developing, as the temperature values increase, according to the nature of the gravitational collapse? An energy valuation according to this radius allows one to think that "somewhere in this creation" the relativistic nature of the fluidity is taken to a point of that "emergent process." One had to account for the developing nature of the dark energy.

Phil Warnell:

If time is an emergent entity, rather then fundamental, then is perplexing why the universe had a beginning. For if time is both infinite and eternal and the universe is neither, it might be of reason to be limited in magnitude and yet why the wait? This also must form to be part of the explanation.

String theory and it first Three Microseconds by it's very nature pushes back perspective beyond Steven Weinberg's First Three Minutes. Consider Before 1 Planck Time

Before a time classified as a Planck time, 10-43 seconds, all of the four fundamental forces are presumed to have been unified into one force. All matter, energy, space and time are presumed to have exploded outward from the original singularity. Nothing is known of this period.

The Foundations of Mathematics, Invented or Discovered?

Mathematical ProblemsLecture delivered before the International Congress of Mathematicians at Paris in 1900By Professor David Hilbert

While insisting on rigor in the proof as a requirement for a perfect solution of a problem, I should like, on the other hand, to oppose the opinion that only the concepts of analysis, or even those of arithmetic alone, are susceptible of a fully rigorous treatment. This opinion, occasionally advocated by eminent men, I consider entirely erroneous. Such a one-sided interpretation of the requirement of rigor would soon lead to the ignoring of all concepts arising from geometry, mechanics and physics, to a stoppage of the flow of new material from the outside world, and finally, indeed, as a last consequence, to the rejection of the ideas of the continuum and of the irrational number. But what an important nerve, vital to mathematical science, would be cut by the extirpation of geometry and mathematical physics! On the contrary I think that wherever, from the side of the theory of knowledge or in geometry, or from the theories of natural or physical science, mathematical ideas come up, the problem arises for mathematical science to investigate the principles underlying these ideas and so to establish them upon a simple and complete system of axioms, that the exactness of the new ideas and their applicability to deduction shall be in no respect inferior to those of the old arithmetical concepts.

The original address "Mathematische Probleme" appeared in Göttinger Nachrichten, 1900, pp. 253-297, and in Archiv der Mathematik und Physik, (3) 1 (1901), 44-63 and 213-237. [A fuller title of the journal Göttinger Nachrichten is Nachrichten von der Königl. Gesellschaft der Wiss. zu Göttingen.]

Phil Warnell:For if time is both infinite and eternal and the universe is neither

So current understanding has been pushed to consider that there is no geometry which can be seen inside the blackhole? If this is not possible, then the very nature of the geometry is existing at "another level" has to be part of an "emergent process" before it manifests from it's previous state?

So what is that previous state that this universe came from? This universe then, is part and parcel of an "existing universe." While you may consider time as eternal, then what would allow for such a space to emergent within that universe to create a new beginning and another offshoot of it?

See:
What is Happening at the Singularity?

A New Cosmological View?