Friends,
Perhaps I am going to deal with this topic with some criticism and harshness, but not with the intention of offending or harming anyone, but with the intention of making it clear in the points of view and postulates that I have about it.
The first thing would be to provide a new concept in terms of its characteristics: These are the Bright Cores.

Bright Core: Part I

"The Bright Cores are the true sources of light and energy emitters in the Universe, produced by the concentrations and accumulations of matter in large masses with high energy density"

It is not that it is something completely new or unknown, but its characteristics and properties are what make it special and with its own identity.
When, due to the action of gravity, there is a concentration and accumulation of matter and energy in a certain body or "particle", a pressure of existing matter is produced that drives the emission of energy at various levels, in addition to creating magnetic fields to its surroundings.
Well, this emission of energy is what causes the body or particles to become a bright focus, which can be with visible light or not.
In general, gravity produces accumulation of matter that is taking place continuously in the cosmos, in such a way that every orbital system (for example, atoms) is always receiving more energetic particles from the outside, proceeding to emit them with the potential own of each atom.
Therefore, the bright core will be synonymous with a great accumulation and pressure of matter, which will expel smaller energetic particles, such as light.
We find these bright cores throughout the universe, and they are produced and manifest when the concentration of mass is very high and the internal pressure forces the matter to recompose itself and expel part of its energy contained in the emission of smaller energetic particles, such as light, heat particles and even much larger particles such as alpha particles.
Therefore, the stars and the galactic centers will be bright cores; but the nuclei of planets and large masses whose interior is subjected to high pressures and is molten and capable of emitting all kinds of energy can also be considered as bright cores.
Therefore, the bright cores in the universe are infinite.

Dimensions of the bright cores:

At each cosmic level, ..., microcosm, macrocosm, supra-cosm,...., the accumulations of matter, and therefore the dimension of the orbital systems (nuclei with orbitals around them) have a maximum limit, which we can measure by means of their contained energy density, which should be the same at all cosmic levels.
As we know, authentic orbital systems (atoms, stars) have a minimum dimension to form the smallest unit (in atoms, hydrogen; in stars the smalleststar) and a maximum dimension for the largest unit (in atoms (1x250) they would be the uranids, and in stars supernovae).
Well, once these dimensions of accumulation of matter have been surpassed, the system explodes forming other smaller systems and a huge quantity of particles.(explosion of uraniums, supernovae..)
We have seen that the smallest atomic units (hydrogen) have an energy density of 3.14 g/cm^3, and adjusting it would give us that the maximum unit (uranids) would have a density of 50 g/cm^3., taking in mind that this energy is measured for the orbital system as a whole, (nucleus with orbital periphery)
Well, it is theorized that in stars and supra-stars this energy density ratio also remains at the same values (Applying the hidden parameter)
* An interesting note may be that according to this model (ferman-TOE 1992) our Big-bang possibly would come from the destruction (or emission of energy) by a large Bright Core of the cosmic level higher than ours, or supra-cosmos.
* For this reason of size and maximum energy density allowed in the cosmos, black holes cannot exist..

Galaxies:
And this is what occurs in the galactic nuclei, where a large accumulation of stars due to gravitational attraction come together to form a galactic disk with a more compact nucleus and greater light emission.
Then the nucleus of a galaxy constitutes a Bright Core.
But what are galaxies and their bright cores like?
As we have seen in this cosmic and atomic theory, every large accumulation of matter creates gravitational and magnetic fields around it that, for better mechanical balance, rotate the central nucleus, creating a rotation equator on which the orbitals are distributed.
In galaxies they take the form of a disk with a more compact central core and a lower density of materials (stars) distributed on the spin equator.
As we continually see, the nuclei of galaxies are more compact and with a greater number of stars, which is why they produce greater brightness, in addition to taking a more spherical and extensive shape over the center of the galaxy.
And as we said, this is what you see when you look at galaxies, a brighter disk at their center.

Black holes: Karl Schwarzschild metric. Part II

Personal vision and consideration of the birth and reason for the holes:
I believe that the father of black holes could be Einstein since with his intuitive, although erroneous postulates; gravity began to be studied, not as concentric force fields on and around matter, but as a deformation of the space around and due to the matter.
Of course I am against this vision and postulate because it does not fit the reality observed and discussed with logic, (for example):
The curvature of space without being a force field could not drag or accelerate a particle of matter, but quite the opposite, it would be braked when taking the curvature.
However, Mr. Karl Schwarzschild and others later seemed to like this theory.
But as the one who rather wanted to define this curvature was Schwarzschild, composing a formula that curved the space around matter in the form of a funnel, pointing towards a pole of rotation, and which later has served to draw us what black holes are like, then to this formula and method of curvature I will direct my opposition.

We all know the deformation explained by Karl Schwarzschild, and that can be seen in the drawing, so looking at this deformation I will try to expose some contradictions and inconveniences of the theorem or postulate, referring to black holes in particular, which is our subject, and always using the theories and assumptions that are made about these black holes which we normally place in the center of the galaxies, which we say all they have their corresponding black hole.

1.- -- In the first place, black holes are considered to have no material particles, or they are not defined if they do. They seem have just energy focused on their centers; energies that can usually be distinguished by their great gravity.
Well, here the contradictions begin.
--A curved space like Schwarzschild's is not a compressed space, and to make matter disappear and be compressed into a small space it is necessary that the space is compressed when it forms matter, but it also needs an external force that compresses it.
--If there is only compressed energy in the black hole, and as it is said it has a gigantic mass, we must to take in mind what the Standard model says, and where is explained that mass is caused and granted by the Higgs Boson.
What happens then in the black hole, that there are infinite Higgs bosons and that these can also give mass to energy?

2.--- Secondly, it could refer to the observations of the galaxies and the Schwarzschild scheme.
Astrophysicists who support the possible existence of these black holes in the center of galaxies say that their existence could be true since the rotating stars of the galactic disk rotate faster than expected.
So, if we take into account the great gravitational power that black holes are said to have, it would not be possible for any star to be directly, without rotating equatorially, above or below the center of the galaxy, since it would be attracted and absorbed by the powerful center.
And therefore, this center devoid of stars could be observed in all galaxies, which would be seen as a large black inside without any light.
But no, what we see is a luminous center that contains the highest density and number of stars in the galaxy. So what is observed is not a Black hole but a Bright Core.
3.- Referring also to the Schwarzschild scheme, observing the galaxy in profile, from the plane of rotation, one would see a sinking towards the center (in the form of a hole) at the north pole, and a projection (wormhole) at the south pole.
But not: We see that the centre of both, north and south poles is simply a large and dense accumulation of stars. (Bright Core)
Therefore, no trace of the Schwarzschild scheme anywhere in the galaxies
Of course neither in our sun, which is an important mass of matter, neither in the planets that have enough matter also.
So what do we do in this case?
Well, discuss and review evidence and observations, or simply, ignore the obvious, logical and visible, and dedicate ourselves to expanding our warehouse of virtual and science fiction inventions.

As we see in the following drawing and in the center of the galaxies, the stars and material that existed above and below the black hole would be quickly absorbed, leaving the black hole fully visible at the poles.
And let us remember the scientific position on tests and observations to demonstrate a theory, phenomenon or physical event:
"All the tests and observations have to be favourable, otherwise the theory must be wrong."

Thank you friends