Do you choose one model over the other if your basis for it is along the lines of “it sounds weird and unfamiliar to me” or “it sounds less like things I deal with in daily life” or “I cannot imagine what it looks like”? Should you do it?

Surprisingly, in some ways, yes. A model is ultimately an attempt to lossily explain something in terms of (map it to) something else, more familiar. If it fails to do that, maybe it is not a good model.

However, you cannot stop at the term. Yes, we all have seen a black hole (hell, I have one in my bathroom) and none of us have seen IRL a multi-dimensional anything, much less a supermaze fuzzball—but if you consider what the black hole model actually is, with things like event horizon, Hawking radiation, etc., it quickly loses its intuitiveness.

Finally, of course, I’m not a string theorist, but I reckon if your model for something includes singularity as one of its main features then you obviously need some better model.

As to black hole theorising, it is fair game for silliness , so, keeping in line with the joke they would be smoking "shatter", which is held in a kind of awe, even by the most hard core smokers as the densist and most refined form of cannabis availible, and casual observation of the effects and fall out from it's use suggests that it can precipitate life altering situations, also these days it would be very advisable for anyone trying such substsances to exercise extream caution, as 1 the actual stuff is powerfull, and 2 there are many reports of other things bieng added, that are outright deadly bieng thrown in. 3 hence the people I know who were indulging, made there own. And personaly I dont smoke anything, or, even though I do theorise about ,gravity, and black hole, I never expound upon those things, lest I realy get a greater reputation for oddity, and speculations as to what I am smoking.

  is what do string theorist smoke these days.

What's with HN commenters, who are likely very unqualified to comment on string theory details, hating on people working in string theory?

Is Sabine Hossenfelder's anti-string theory propaganda working that well?

They smoke DMT, obviously.

I, for one, really enjoy the ideas they come up with. Super creative!

This is purely based on the definition of "density" here, which is the mass of the black hole divided by the volume inside the event horizon (which is the invisible/black sphere).

However the event horizon does not represent the extent of the mass of the black hole, but rather the point where gravity becomes so strong that nothing can escape it, even light (hence "black" hole/sphere).

We don't really know what's inside the event horizon or how the mass if actually distributed. The concept of singularity is that all the mass is located in a zero volume with infinite density.

just like most fat people have lower density than skinny ones

My understanding is that string theory has basically been tossed aside by most of the field.

It's one of those things that got public support as it fell out of favor in academia. Now it won't go away because the public likes it.

[dead]

You are asking too much.

No, still no.