Now, maybe someone has beat me to the punch, but I also know that any object in the universe, when in motion, requires some measure of force to act upon it in order to slow, stop, or reverse its trajectory - be it gravity, or the disruptive mass of air particles, a physical objects like a hand stopping a ball, what have you.

The pulling gravitational force of the average black hole is so strong, that it will not allow light to escape.  Now, operating on the assumpting that light moves at 299,792,458 meters per second, some force will have to counter-act this amount of energy and speed with an equal force at minimum to 'stop' the light.   However, its also been put out there that light doesn't simply 'stop' when it comes into contact with a black holes gravitational force, it is actually bent into the black hole, and stopped from exiting again completely, meaning the light cannot achieve an escape velocity - it simply does not have enough speed, and potential energy, to overcome the force of gravity itself in the black hole, leading me to believe that some object or force entering the black hole does in fact have a speed and direction, and that it does supercede the speed of light, even if it only effects a fundamental particle rather than an object specifically.

Another way this fallacy could work, is that the light particles and all of its energy is simply destroyed by the counteractive force, but this would discredit another important rule of physics: That energy can neither be created nor destroyed.

So which is it?  Einsteins Theory of Relativity, or the law of Conversation of Energy?

By some force acting upon, and then reversing the trajectory of light, it has to be some particle, material, or force, capable of moving faster than the speed of light, purely, and completely.

Or the force is so strong, that if violates the rule of energy conservation, and completely destroys the light at a particle level.

Either concept is particularly difficult to wrap ones mind around, but I find it interesting.  I'm sure some scientist out there could crunch the numbers, I only think based on operative rules, and counteroperative rules, so maybe I'm wrong, or have simply missed a fact of physics I don't personally understand.

Either way, I'm intrigued by my own idea.  Either light is destroyed, or like clockwork, to move something faster than light, we simply have to take a closer look at a looming insatiable black-hole without dying.

Thats the tough part though, its an unobservable-intrigue, much like trying to use light to see whats happening on a quantum scale - since it directly effects the sample, except in this case - how do you observe something that is designed to be a matter trash-compactor in the vacuum of space when even getting 'a little' close to it will effectually destroy you and anything you would use to observe it.

Some things, I think, will never be known, as life, and death, and life again, will come much sooner.  And that is one reason, we as men, are not gods.