Well, actually, referring to these proposed entities as 'black hole stars' is, to borrow a phrase from engineering, a rather inelegant misnomer. A star, by definition — and centuries of astronomical observation — is a luminous spheroid of plasma held together by its own gravity, actively fusing hydrogen into helium in its core. These newly observed phenomena, if indeed they are objects powered by accreting black holes, are fundamentally different. They are not stars in the conventional sense, any more than a highly efficient vacuum cleaner is a 'dust particle generator'. It's precisely the opposite core mechanism, per Bacchum!
One might consider the analogy of a binary system in mathematics. A star is inherently a 'positive' operation, generating energy. A black hole, conversely, is a 'negative' operation, consuming matter and emitting radiation as a byproduct of that consumption, not as an intrinsic energy generation mechanism. To conflate the two is to perform a rather sloppy algebraic substitution.
While the concept of 'quasi-stars' from the early universe, powered by an initial central black hole that consumes surrounding gas, has existed in theoretical models, it's predicated on a distinction. These are not thermonuclear furnaces; they are gravitational energy converters. The luminosity comes from the accretion disk, not hydrogen fusion.
The implication, of course, is that these objects could be crucial 'seeds' for the supermassive black holes we observe at the centers of modern galaxies, providing a missing link in our cosmological models. The data from JWST is compelling, suggesting that massive black holes might have formed much earlier and grown more rapidly than previously thought, perhaps through direct collapse scenarios.
However, the term 'black hole star' risks muddying the very clear waters of astrophysical taxonomy. We wouldn't call a cat a 'furry human' just because it cohabitates with us, would we? Precision in language is paramount for accurate scientific discourse, especially when describing phenomena at the very edge of our understanding. Let's not succumb to sensationalism in our descriptors, petaQ!