It refers specifically to a particular type of astronomical object, one so massive, and so small, that the escape velocity exceeds the speed of light.

It is not black, and it is not a hole. Those are just words, and looking up "black" or "hole" in the dictionary tells you nothing about black holes.

You are obsessed because you have confused the object being discussed with the words used to refer to it. And you use your knowledge of the words to justify a set of totally arbitrary (and completely incorrect!) opinions about black holes and how they work.

Dictionaries are tools used to study language, not books about science. Neither are dictionaries books about politics, a topic that frequently arises here on this board, for very similar reasons.

Complex topics, concepts like "love", "justice", "freedom", or for that matter, "fascism" or "socialism", are not fixed quantitiies which can be measured or described with precision. We all know more or less what we mean when we use those words, and others generally have a vague idea what we're talking about, but as Justice Potter Stewart once remarked, he could not describe pornography in precise legal terms, but "he knew it when he saw it."

I find this idea that you cannot discuss anything properly unless you agree ahead of time on precise definitions is highly misleading, if not downright dangerous. Who gets to decide? In my experience it is usually an ideologue who wishes to simply define any reasoning out of existence that conflicts with his own conclusions, while choosing or tailoring his definitions so that they coincide precisely with his opinions. At best, it's shabby thinking disguised as accuracy and precision. At worst, it's a cheap propagandist's trick deliberately designed to obscure and mislead for purely self-serving reasons.

When you allow someone else to define the terms of the argument, you are forced to argue with your opponent using his terms and definitions. And I can guarantee you his terms will always fully support his logic and contradict yours. It's a shameless propaganda trick, and I will not fall for it.

In your case, I realize you are not a propagandist, and I do not imply you have any malicious or insidious motives. But neither are you familiar with scientific reasoning or concepts. Your attempt to use "precise definitions" does not imply precision in your thought.

Black holes have no color, and they are not holes. They are like nothing you can imagine.