▲ 962 ▼ Sad Ganymede noises (mander.xyz) submitted 7 months ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz 194 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] nialv7@lemmy.world 154 points 7 months ago (5 children) Size doesn't matter permalink fedilink source hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] Zerush@lemmy.ml 106 points 7 months ago (26 children) Correct, it's called planet when it orbits arround the Sun AND has cleaned it's orbit from asteroids, not the case of Pluto, whose orbit is still full of other objects, some even bigger than Pluto itself. If it orbits an Planet instead of the Sun, it's a Moon, even if it is bigger than some other planets. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 30 child comments replies: [–] Klear@quokk.au 27 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 child) "All right, Ganymede. You can be a planet, but first you have to clean up your orbit. Start with Jupiter." permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Saapas@piefed.zip 3 points 7 months ago Villain origin story permalink fedilink source parent [–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago (2 children) when it orbits arround the Sun AND has cleaned it’s orbit from asteroid Jupiter, largest of all dwarf planets, shares its orbit with some i don't know million asteroids. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] ContriteErudite@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago (1 child) I've often thought that 'clearing' it's orbit is misleading. I believe the definition ought to be changed to 'controls' or 'governs' its orbit. This allows for objects in stable L4/L5 locations without inviting the caveats that 'clearing' needs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 7 months ago Its because its a colloquial phrase that more or less the media picked up and ran with. Actual astronomers and astrophysicists use math to describe what they're talking about, math that you can find and learn fairly easily on wikipedia. Lay people tend to just evaluate a phrase for its extremely literal meaning, not realizing that it is at best just pop science jargon, short hand to refer to a pretty well defined and precise concept, that is difficult to summarize without losing specificity. There are many, many other examples of this kind of thing happening with other phrases or terms used to refer to complex concepts. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] nexguy@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago* (2 children) Jupiter has a permanent cloud of asteroids that follow it and neptune crosses the orbit of pluto so neither of those have cleared their orbits so of course they made exceptions so that their contrived definition fits. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 43 points 7 months ago* (18 children) Do you mean the asteroids at the Lagrangian points? Every single planet has asteroids there because math/physics dictates those points to be stable. Jupiter has the most at its points because it's the largest planet. Same with Neptune cleaning its orbit: It has collided with every single thing in its orbit EXCEPT those that synced their orbits to Neptune. An object that is gravitationally dominated by a single planet should not be a planet under any definition. Sources because I had to read into your claims and I'm no astrophysicist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange_point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonant_trans-Neptunian_object permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 18 child comments load more comments (18 replies) [–] Yondoza@sh.itjust.works 23 points 7 months ago* (10 children) Jupiter's Trojan asteroids sit at Lagrange points. Material found there is not counted in the 'clearing the orbit' criteria. They are in stable orbits caused by the mass of the planet in question, not in lieu of a massive enough body. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments load more comments (10 replies) [–] CatAssTrophy@safest.space 2 points 7 months ago (1 child) However, if a moon is sufficiently large compared to its planet, it also gets to be a planet and part of a binary planet system, not a moon. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago Aka the Charon-Pluto binary dwarf planet system permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (22 replies) [–] wizzor@sopuli.xyz 22 points 7 months ago (2 children) Unless you are Pluto. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] tdawg@lemmy.world 29 points 7 months ago (1 child) Wasn't it more bc it doesn't clear it's surroundings? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] accideath@feddit.org 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 child) And it has an orbit at a different angle than the 8 Planets and at it’s narrowest the ellipse of Plutos orbit is actually closer to the Sun than Uranus Neptune. Edit: That moment when you‘re so done, you fuck up the order of our planets… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Morphit@feddit.uk 4 points 7 months ago (1 child) Do you mean Neptune? Pluto's perihelion is 29.7 AU while Uranus' aphelion is 20.1 AU. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) load more comments (1 reply) [–] itsmistermoon@piefed.social 10 points 7 months ago (1 child) That's what I tell my wife but she won't listen Come on guys, laugh permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] prettybunnys@piefed.social 13 points 7 months ago (1 child) We’re laughing with your wife. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] itsmistermoon@piefed.social 8 points 7 months ago (1 child) What have I done permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] prettybunnys@piefed.social 9 points 7 months ago Oh honey it’s ok permalink fedilink source parent [–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 months ago That’s not what she said. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] Zerush@lemmy.ml 106 points 7 months ago (26 children) Correct, it's called planet when it orbits arround the Sun AND has cleaned it's orbit from asteroids, not the case of Pluto, whose orbit is still full of other objects, some even bigger than Pluto itself. If it orbits an Planet instead of the Sun, it's a Moon, even if it is bigger than some other planets. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 30 child comments replies: [–] Klear@quokk.au 27 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 child) "All right, Ganymede. You can be a planet, but first you have to clean up your orbit. Start with Jupiter." permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Saapas@piefed.zip 3 points 7 months ago Villain origin story permalink fedilink source parent [–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago (2 children) when it orbits arround the Sun AND has cleaned it’s orbit from asteroid Jupiter, largest of all dwarf planets, shares its orbit with some i don't know million asteroids. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] ContriteErudite@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago (1 child) I've often thought that 'clearing' it's orbit is misleading. I believe the definition ought to be changed to 'controls' or 'governs' its orbit. This allows for objects in stable L4/L5 locations without inviting the caveats that 'clearing' needs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 7 months ago Its because its a colloquial phrase that more or less the media picked up and ran with. Actual astronomers and astrophysicists use math to describe what they're talking about, math that you can find and learn fairly easily on wikipedia. Lay people tend to just evaluate a phrase for its extremely literal meaning, not realizing that it is at best just pop science jargon, short hand to refer to a pretty well defined and precise concept, that is difficult to summarize without losing specificity. There are many, many other examples of this kind of thing happening with other phrases or terms used to refer to complex concepts. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply) [–] nexguy@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago* (2 children) Jupiter has a permanent cloud of asteroids that follow it and neptune crosses the orbit of pluto so neither of those have cleared their orbits so of course they made exceptions so that their contrived definition fits. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 43 points 7 months ago* (18 children) Do you mean the asteroids at the Lagrangian points? Every single planet has asteroids there because math/physics dictates those points to be stable. Jupiter has the most at its points because it's the largest planet. Same with Neptune cleaning its orbit: It has collided with every single thing in its orbit EXCEPT those that synced their orbits to Neptune. An object that is gravitationally dominated by a single planet should not be a planet under any definition. Sources because I had to read into your claims and I'm no astrophysicist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange_point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonant_trans-Neptunian_object permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 18 child comments load more comments (18 replies) [–] Yondoza@sh.itjust.works 23 points 7 months ago* (10 children) Jupiter's Trojan asteroids sit at Lagrange points. Material found there is not counted in the 'clearing the orbit' criteria. They are in stable orbits caused by the mass of the planet in question, not in lieu of a massive enough body. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments load more comments (10 replies) [–] CatAssTrophy@safest.space 2 points 7 months ago (1 child) However, if a moon is sufficiently large compared to its planet, it also gets to be a planet and part of a binary planet system, not a moon. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago Aka the Charon-Pluto binary dwarf planet system permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (22 replies)
[–] Klear@quokk.au 27 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 child) "All right, Ganymede. You can be a planet, but first you have to clean up your orbit. Start with Jupiter." permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Saapas@piefed.zip 3 points 7 months ago Villain origin story permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago (2 children) when it orbits arround the Sun AND has cleaned it’s orbit from asteroid Jupiter, largest of all dwarf planets, shares its orbit with some i don't know million asteroids. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] ContriteErudite@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago (1 child) I've often thought that 'clearing' it's orbit is misleading. I believe the definition ought to be changed to 'controls' or 'governs' its orbit. This allows for objects in stable L4/L5 locations without inviting the caveats that 'clearing' needs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 7 months ago Its because its a colloquial phrase that more or less the media picked up and ran with. Actual astronomers and astrophysicists use math to describe what they're talking about, math that you can find and learn fairly easily on wikipedia. Lay people tend to just evaluate a phrase for its extremely literal meaning, not realizing that it is at best just pop science jargon, short hand to refer to a pretty well defined and precise concept, that is difficult to summarize without losing specificity. There are many, many other examples of this kind of thing happening with other phrases or terms used to refer to complex concepts. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (1 reply)
[–] ContriteErudite@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago (1 child) I've often thought that 'clearing' it's orbit is misleading. I believe the definition ought to be changed to 'controls' or 'governs' its orbit. This allows for objects in stable L4/L5 locations without inviting the caveats that 'clearing' needs. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 7 months ago Its because its a colloquial phrase that more or less the media picked up and ran with. Actual astronomers and astrophysicists use math to describe what they're talking about, math that you can find and learn fairly easily on wikipedia. Lay people tend to just evaluate a phrase for its extremely literal meaning, not realizing that it is at best just pop science jargon, short hand to refer to a pretty well defined and precise concept, that is difficult to summarize without losing specificity. There are many, many other examples of this kind of thing happening with other phrases or terms used to refer to complex concepts. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 7 months ago Its because its a colloquial phrase that more or less the media picked up and ran with. Actual astronomers and astrophysicists use math to describe what they're talking about, math that you can find and learn fairly easily on wikipedia. Lay people tend to just evaluate a phrase for its extremely literal meaning, not realizing that it is at best just pop science jargon, short hand to refer to a pretty well defined and precise concept, that is difficult to summarize without losing specificity. There are many, many other examples of this kind of thing happening with other phrases or terms used to refer to complex concepts. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] nexguy@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago* (2 children) Jupiter has a permanent cloud of asteroids that follow it and neptune crosses the orbit of pluto so neither of those have cleared their orbits so of course they made exceptions so that their contrived definition fits. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 43 points 7 months ago* (18 children) Do you mean the asteroids at the Lagrangian points? Every single planet has asteroids there because math/physics dictates those points to be stable. Jupiter has the most at its points because it's the largest planet. Same with Neptune cleaning its orbit: It has collided with every single thing in its orbit EXCEPT those that synced their orbits to Neptune. An object that is gravitationally dominated by a single planet should not be a planet under any definition. Sources because I had to read into your claims and I'm no astrophysicist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange_point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonant_trans-Neptunian_object permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 18 child comments load more comments (18 replies) [–] Yondoza@sh.itjust.works 23 points 7 months ago* (10 children) Jupiter's Trojan asteroids sit at Lagrange points. Material found there is not counted in the 'clearing the orbit' criteria. They are in stable orbits caused by the mass of the planet in question, not in lieu of a massive enough body. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments load more comments (10 replies)
[–] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 43 points 7 months ago* (18 children) Do you mean the asteroids at the Lagrangian points? Every single planet has asteroids there because math/physics dictates those points to be stable. Jupiter has the most at its points because it's the largest planet. Same with Neptune cleaning its orbit: It has collided with every single thing in its orbit EXCEPT those that synced their orbits to Neptune. An object that is gravitationally dominated by a single planet should not be a planet under any definition. Sources because I had to read into your claims and I'm no astrophysicist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange_point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonant_trans-Neptunian_object permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 18 child comments load more comments (18 replies)
[–] Yondoza@sh.itjust.works 23 points 7 months ago* (10 children) Jupiter's Trojan asteroids sit at Lagrange points. Material found there is not counted in the 'clearing the orbit' criteria. They are in stable orbits caused by the mass of the planet in question, not in lieu of a massive enough body. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments load more comments (10 replies)
[–] CatAssTrophy@safest.space 2 points 7 months ago (1 child) However, if a moon is sufficiently large compared to its planet, it also gets to be a planet and part of a binary planet system, not a moon. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago Aka the Charon-Pluto binary dwarf planet system permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago Aka the Charon-Pluto binary dwarf planet system permalink fedilink source parent
[–] wizzor@sopuli.xyz 22 points 7 months ago (2 children) Unless you are Pluto. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] tdawg@lemmy.world 29 points 7 months ago (1 child) Wasn't it more bc it doesn't clear it's surroundings? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] accideath@feddit.org 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 child) And it has an orbit at a different angle than the 8 Planets and at it’s narrowest the ellipse of Plutos orbit is actually closer to the Sun than Uranus Neptune. Edit: That moment when you‘re so done, you fuck up the order of our planets… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Morphit@feddit.uk 4 points 7 months ago (1 child) Do you mean Neptune? Pluto's perihelion is 29.7 AU while Uranus' aphelion is 20.1 AU. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply) load more comments (1 reply)
[–] tdawg@lemmy.world 29 points 7 months ago (1 child) Wasn't it more bc it doesn't clear it's surroundings? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] accideath@feddit.org 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 child) And it has an orbit at a different angle than the 8 Planets and at it’s narrowest the ellipse of Plutos orbit is actually closer to the Sun than Uranus Neptune. Edit: That moment when you‘re so done, you fuck up the order of our planets… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Morphit@feddit.uk 4 points 7 months ago (1 child) Do you mean Neptune? Pluto's perihelion is 29.7 AU while Uranus' aphelion is 20.1 AU. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] accideath@feddit.org 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 child) And it has an orbit at a different angle than the 8 Planets and at it’s narrowest the ellipse of Plutos orbit is actually closer to the Sun than Uranus Neptune. Edit: That moment when you‘re so done, you fuck up the order of our planets… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Morphit@feddit.uk 4 points 7 months ago (1 child) Do you mean Neptune? Pluto's perihelion is 29.7 AU while Uranus' aphelion is 20.1 AU. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] Morphit@feddit.uk 4 points 7 months ago (1 child) Do you mean Neptune? Pluto's perihelion is 29.7 AU while Uranus' aphelion is 20.1 AU. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment load more comments (1 reply)
[–] itsmistermoon@piefed.social 10 points 7 months ago (1 child) That's what I tell my wife but she won't listen Come on guys, laugh permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] prettybunnys@piefed.social 13 points 7 months ago (1 child) We’re laughing with your wife. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] itsmistermoon@piefed.social 8 points 7 months ago (1 child) What have I done permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] prettybunnys@piefed.social 9 points 7 months ago Oh honey it’s ok permalink fedilink source parent
[–] prettybunnys@piefed.social 13 points 7 months ago (1 child) We’re laughing with your wife. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] itsmistermoon@piefed.social 8 points 7 months ago (1 child) What have I done permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] prettybunnys@piefed.social 9 points 7 months ago Oh honey it’s ok permalink fedilink source parent
[–] itsmistermoon@piefed.social 8 points 7 months ago (1 child) What have I done permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] prettybunnys@piefed.social 9 points 7 months ago Oh honey it’s ok permalink fedilink source parent
[–] prettybunnys@piefed.social 9 points 7 months ago Oh honey it’s ok permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 months ago That’s not what she said. permalink fedilink source parent