you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 7 months ago* (2 children)

There is no objective criteria for what a planet is and isn’t

There are - exactly three.

  1. is in orbit around a star,
  2. has sufficient mass to assume hydrostatic equilibrium (a nearly round shape), and
  3. has "cleared the neighbourhood" around its orbit.

The last one means that its gravitational pull has removed any smaller objects that might be in its orbit, either by kicking them out of it, or by catching them as moons.

Pluto's orbit is full of debris.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    There is no objective criteria for what a planet is and isn't. Like a lot of things in nature, things just exist, and as humans we categorize them.

    You're the second person to ignore the sentence immediately following that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Because that sentence doesn't really make sense. "Criteria" is a human concept. Nature doesn't do "criteria", nor "objective" for that matter. So, yes, there's no "natural criteria" for when something is X or Y, we, humans, make those criteria. Doesn't matter if it's in relation to animals, plants, or planets.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    So you're saying things just exist, and as humans we categorize them? Because that's what I said.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    The idea of a "category" is inherently human. Just like "objective" and "criteria".

    Which means there is objective criteria for what is categorised as a planet - it's whatever we, humans, define them to be.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 7 months ago

    The scientific community was basically backed into a corner: either create a new category for Pluto and similar bodies, or we go from 9 planets to over 3,000 (iirc), lol.

    The only sensible choice was made, imo.

  • source
  • parent