Planet Definitions
xkcd.com

Under the ‘has cleared its orbital neighborhood’ and ‘fuses hydrogen into helium’ definitions, thanks to human activities Earth technically no longer qualifies as a planet but DOES count as a star.

https://explainxkcd.com/3063/

  • Rhaedas@fedia.io
    2·
    4 hours ago

    That’s a good question. Is being hydrostatic equilibrium the only physical attribute we should use for classification? Should Ceres be a planet?

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      4 hours ago

      Should Ceres be a planet?

      I honestly don’t know. I tend to say no, as it seems to just be a lifeless rock with no geological activity. I’d love to have rules to identify that, made by planetary geologists.

      But I wouldn’t want to disqualify a body with planetary characteristics like geological activity just because the space around it is busy, or it’s orbit is not in the ecliptic plain, etc.

      This comment is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

      • Rhaedas@fedia.io
        1·
        3 hours ago

        Ceres does appear to be active in some form with cryovolcanoes, based on the 2015 Dawn mission.

        I think focus ought to be more on what the qualifications are for the minor label. What does it mean to be minor?

        • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          3 hours ago

          Ceres does appear to be active in some form with cryovolcanoes, based on the 2015 Dawn mission.

          Then It’s say that it was a planet, though IANAPG.

          I think focus ought to be more on what the qualifications are for the minor label. What does it mean to be minor?

          There shouldn’t be a ‘minor’ nomenclature, it’s a contrivance. It’s a planet, or not

          Also, to reiterate, the issue being discussed is one of disqualification, and not what qualifies. Identifying a body as a planet or not should not be done based on the criteria of the crowded or not nature of the space around it.

          This comment is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0