• nexguy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Since categorizing something as a planet means nothing then traditionalist is the only way to go. If Mercury is in the same category as Jupiter and a sudden orbit change can mean a thing might no longer be called a planet then there is no scientific value in calling things planets. They are just traditional names given to fairly random objects like constellations.

  • Tudsamfa@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I cannot respect people who call Pluto a planet on internet forums whenever this topic comes up. Not because I agree with NASA, think their definition is perfect, or think those people just cling to nostalgia and hate change, no.

    I cannot respect them because Pluto does not care and trying to white knight perceived attacks against it will not impress it, those people are just being pathetic.

      • gmtom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Wrong. Pluto is actually one of the coldest bodies in the solar system at an average of -232c

        • Akasazh@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Since they are both dogs, even though Goofy is anthropomorphic, Pluto and Goofy could technically procreate.

          Do with this knowledge as you seem fit…

          • Etterra@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            24 hours ago

            While I’m jaded and cynical enough to not be moved by anything anymore and I have already heard that information, I’m somehow still disgusted that you invoked rule 34 here of all places.

    • RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s not white knighting a planet. I’m literally from where it was discovered. I went on field trips to Lowell Observatory as a kid. Fuck all y’all who won’t accept my planet.

      All dwarf planets are planets. Don’t discriminate.

  • einkorn@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Am I missing something, or are the images for “Traditionalist” and “Modern” swapped?

  • j4k3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    I’m a Universalist. It is all the same thing at different phases of matter at various temperatures and pressures combined with the gravity to hold onto various materials. Keep stacking Earths over and over and you will eventually get a gas giant then a star then a black hole.

    What I will never support is the stupidity of defining any object by external criteria. If a gravitationally bound world is acted upon in a way that shifts its orbit, the object cannot be redefined. This is a definition of a state, not an object. Planet, as defined by the IAU is not a noun. Such is what I expect when a highschool teacher wrote a definition instead of actual planetary scientists. I suppose such draconian nonsense was intended to show the backwardness and medieval state of the science of astronomy.

    • adb@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      You can hide behind fancy words but clearly this is just being simplistic

        • adb@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          I’m sorry if you didn’t get my lame joke over the fact that the universalist and simplistic definitions of planets give the same result in the comic