There are 4 mathematical Black Hole solutions to Einstein’s field equation of gravity in special relativity. To define the terms, Q= electric charge and J= spin angular momentum.
1)Schwarzchild requires that Q=0 and J=0 with the cosmological constant=0, with the gravitating mass isolated in a vacuum in a one mass universe where the black hole is the only mass that exists.
2)Kerr requires that Q=0 and J = not 0, again with the gravitating mass isolated in a vacuum in a one mass universe where the black hole is the only mass that exists.
3)Reissner-Nordstrom requires that Q= not 0 and J=0 with a static metric in which Nothing Is Moving i.e. the gravitational field of an electrically charged* non-rotating spherically symmetrical body of mass where nothing moves. (It strikes me that this precludes the possibility of collapse, being inwardly directed movement.)
4)Kerr-Newman requires that Q= not 0 and J= not 0 with the cosmological constant =0. This solution is dismissed because observed astronomical objects do not possess appreciable net electric charge.(*this objection also applies to #3)

The first three solutions do not describe the universe I observe that is populated with millions of galaxies and billions of stars, none isolated, all whizzing around interacting gravitationally, and traveling in an interstellar medium composed of electromagnetic ionized plasma that ebbs and flows. Our space probes and telescopes have indeed found that electrical charge separation exists in space.

In my book one does not get to create a black hole in the isolated abstract environment of your computer model code and then get to plunk this math generated invisible phantom down willy nilly in the universe to explain something you can not explain.
“…now it’s dramatically lit up to become one of the most radio luminous TDEs ever observed.”
In the physics lab we observe that radio emissions are generated by electric currents flowing in conductors. In nature we observe that electrical lighting discharges through an atmospheric ionized conducting plasma pathway while generating intense radio emissions.
My conjecture is that the swirling cloud of spagetified plasma is highly conductive. A fluctuating magnetic field produces an electric current in a conductor. The Electric current produces radio emissions. They are observing cosmic scale lightning.

Cosmology needs to incorporate plasma physics into the inertia/gravity model.
Rip the black hole band aid off the failing model. It will be painful to many. Hubble and Webb are illuminating our ignorance and it is a glorious thing to witness…unexpectedly.
A Mark Twain Quote is apt: “There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.”

Not exactly. Please see this.

Perhaps if the mass equivalent of gravitational waves were larger or if the black hole was larger, these waves could not leave the black hole and we would truly have no way to detect them. Perhaps there are such massive black holes that they are truly undetectable and they do not change the curvature of spacetime or emit gravitational waves.

From our frame of reference the matter is coming out 3 years later. But that is irrelevant from the point of the matter. If we had been able to measure things from the perspective of the matter. It probably would have seemed like only a small fraction of that.

Now if it could be shown that the matter passed the event horizon. Then we clearly demonstrate that we do not have a particularly firm grasp of physics of black holes.

As so many theories abound about how such massive structures actually operate. I think astrophysics needs to seriously consider (if it has not already) that this particular field requires something along the lines of sub-atomic theories. That the testable and observable physics we regularly rely on for daily life. Simply falls apart at the testable micro and macro limits of what we observe

In interstellar they placed a planrt on the edge of a black hole and it somehow sustained an atmosphere unpossible

At this point we’re essentially at the primitive stage in astrophysics where we’re watching birds and bugs and even bats, and asking, “If they can fly, why can’t I?”

And there’s no way to tell exactly which “That’s odd…” moment will result in a discovery that lets us escape and possibly even prevent the heat-death of the universe.

If the star approached the black hole on a trajectory that just barely grazed the event horizon (basically an orbit with a periapsis at or just above the Schwarzschild radius), or a bit of the star’s infalling gas got accelerated onto such a trajectory, might time dilation alone account for the subjective slowness of that close approach as seen by a distant observer, i.e. us?

In the proper time of the gas, it saw no delay at all, just a very fast pass through periapsis, but an observer at a moderate distance might have watched it traverse that trajectory in slow motion (with any radiation generated during the close approach being very faint due to the extreme gravitational redshift?), and at a greater distance, it would look as if the gas disappeared and then reappeared after a delay?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlFpq49Ri8Y&t=2936s