962
Sad Ganymede noises (mander.xyz)
submitted 7 months ago by to c/science_memes@mander.xyz
194 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -2 points 7 months ago* (1 child)

I understand the exception created for Neptune. But they had to create this exception... for their own brand new rule... in order to classify 8 things. Notice the exception is written very specifically just to keep pluto from "clearing" is orbit.

Another IAU rule is that the body must assume hydrostatic equilibrium(nearly round). Mercury does NOT assume hydrostatic equilibrium. They knew this.

Guess what? They just...decided...Mercury doesn't have to follow that rule.

It was all done very unscientifically.

Edit: I want to add that now there are only 8 planets...in the universe. There are no other planets because the definition includes that they must "orbit the Sun". Not a star but very specifically the Sun. All this with exceptions for just 8 objects? I'm telling you it was a power trip thing more than a scientific endeavor.

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

    Notice the exception is written very specifically just to keep pluto from "clearing" is orbit.

    There are tons of other Kuiper Belt objects in Pluto's orbit. This wasn't an exception written to spite Pluto. If you can attribute any malice to the definition, it comes from not wanting to include Eris, Sedna, Makemake, Quorua, and 200+ other Kuiper Belt objects as planets. Pluto was just caught in the crossfire because it fits with the other Kuiper Belt objects because it is one.

    "orbit the Sun". Not a star but very specifically the Sun.

    This is a level of knitpicking that is completely childish. Grow up.

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

    Can you explains the knitpicking? They specifically decided that only objects orbiting our star can be Planets. It wasn't an oversight but intentional. How can that be explained? Why do that?

    Also, how can mercury be explained? It clearly violated one of the 3 rules with no given exception other than they just decided it can be a planet. Why?

    25% of the 8 objects they wrote rules for needed an exception to make the cut. That doesn't seem odd?

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

    Can you explains the knitpicking? They specifically decided that only objects orbiting our star can be Planets. It wasn’t an oversight but intentional. How can that be explained? Why do that?

    Because we're not going to be visiting any exoplanets anytime soon, so it's not like we can actually check how much they've cleared their orbits.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent