Dave it is very hard to take you seriously when you can't even get the basics right. I try not to discourage people who are passionate about science but unfortunately because of the your misunderstandings this is going to be all bad, so brace yourself.
Lets start with first basic, a "singularity" and an "event horizon" are in no way directly related. They may occur in the same location such as a black hole under some situations but they can also exist without each other.
Try the wikipedia entry on event horizon
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_horizonSo lets be clear what it is
In general relativity, an event horizon is a boundary in spacetime beyond which events cannot affect an outside observer. In layman's terms, it is defined as "the point of no return", i.e., the point at which the gravitational pull becomes so great as to make escape impossible.
They go on to talk about it
most commonly associated with black holes but it is not always.
A gravitational singularity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_singularitySo lets be clear
A gravitational singularity or spacetime singularity is a location where the quantities that are used to measure the gravitational field become infinite in a way that does not depend on the coordinate system. These quantities are the scalar invariant curvatures of spacetime, which includes a measure of the density of matter.
Now Dave Proffitt says this
That the event horizon 'singularity' that exists in Schwarzschild coordinates is somehow fictitious.
You will first have to explain what "event horizon singularity" is because no scientist is going to have a clue what you are talking about. You joined two non related things to make a nonsensical statement.
Then you take this complete mess and go on some weird journey about something that makes even less sense as you mix in more errors.
Can you please just watch the layman friendly movie here
https://www.quantamagazine.org/20150508-what-happens-when-you-fall-into-a-black-hole/So then you will have at least some understanding what science says correctly and you will see the event horizon and the singularity are very different things.
The rest of your pages get even worse as you get more muddled.
Lets also cleanup another thing a static or non rotating black hole probably doesn't exist in nature. Most matter in the universe when it is undergoing accretion spins as does every star we have observed. Thus when these objects form black holes they are almost certainly spinning because of conservation of momentum expect black holes to be spinning in nature or convince me how they could form not spinning.
Lets show you the confusion ... your first page shows a spinning black hole graphic ... this one
Then on your second page called "Inside the Schwarzschild black hole" you start dribbling on about a stationary black hole and mathematics.
So be clear you can't relate these two things directly and you need to take care with this sort of detail to be taken seriously.
So I suggest you ignore static black holes they are just a science toy construct to simplify things and likely don't exist in nature. Any "theory" using a static black hole detail and mathematics is equally just a "toy" theory.
So can you first fix all that up, so I can remotely understand what your theory is and I will go from there.
