Comment on Sad Ganymede noises

• yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  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:

  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange_point

  source

  • nexguy@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Yes, that’s the made up exception. And for neptune not clearing its orbit due to pluto crossing that orbit? Well we have to make an exception for that so…um…the resonance between neptune and pluto. Exception achieved!

    The rules are so contrived that it would not make sense for almost any other system except exactly ours. Whatever it takes to keep Earth’s category of “planet” important… you know… for reasons.

    Very unscientific but very human.

    source

    • Live_your_lives@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      What rules do you believe make for a definition that isn’t contrived? How do you exclude asteroids from your definition or reject other dwarf planets like Ceres without making up contrived exceptions of your own?

      source

      • mech@feddit.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        Planets are round objects orbiting a star.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨23⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      No.

      Lets try a more simple metaphor.

      One person is navigating through a crowd, occasionally bumping into other people, having to juke and dodge their way around.

      Another person has an entourage or body guards to their front, and two gaggles of papparazzi following behind them, at each 45 degree angle to their rear, as they walk through an entire empty street 4 lane street, with some occsional people walking past the whole scene on the sidewalk.

      Pluto and Charon are basically an awkward, clumsy couple trying to get through a densely packed mall or convention.

      Neptune is Taylor Swift, as an entire parade float, just, herself, body guards, papparazzi. And I guess she also can have some literal ingroup orbiters who manage to stick around, their lives revolve around her the same way their walking patterns do.

      And then maybe, by chance, that awkward couple leaves the convention, gets lost, walks the wrong way to a restaurant, and end up just directly crossing the street that Swift walked down, 6 hours ago.

      There, is that a sufficiently relatable visual metaphor to illustrate the difference between the two situations?

      source

      • nexguy@lemmy.world ⁨23⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        It’s a fine metaphor but it doesn’t work for scientific definitions which are exact. The IAU came up with the rule then had to make an exception to their own brand new rule in order to have Neptune remain a planet but not pluto even though both fail the rule. The exception is real and written down, not assumed.

        Yet again another of the IAU rules is the body has to be assume hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round). Mercury is NOT in hydrostatic equilibrium and they knew this. So they just…decided… that Mercury is a planet anyway and does not have to follow that rule.

        So two planets don’t even follow the rules they made yet were unscientifically decided to be planets. Why? What was the point of it? Certainly wasn’t done for any scientific reason.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      And for neptune not clearing its orbit due to pluto crossing that orbit?

      Ah, yes. This is clearly justification for Pluto to become a planet! /s

      source

      • nexguy@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        If the definition of a planet is that it has cleared is orbit then how is Neptune a planet? It shares its orbit with the dwarf planet pluto therefore they should both be dwarf planets correct?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• Yondoza@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Jupiter’s Trojan asteroids sit at Lagrange points. Material found there is not counted in the ‘clearing the orbit’ calculations. They are in stable orbits caused by the mass of the planet in question, not in lieu of a massive enough body.

  source

  • nexguy@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    Well of course that was the exception they had to come up with for their contrived rule. The exception is: “whatever it takes to make pluto not a planet”. Since the vote was agenda fueled and not a scientific discussion.

    Once something new is discovered and breaks the rules they will have to modify the contrived rule to keep pluto not a planet.

    source

    • athatet@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Hold on. What agenda wants Pluto to not be a planet?

      source

      • qarbone@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        Someone printed out a buncha shirts with only 8 solar orbits in the system. Obviously easier to lobby Pluto off the team than to reprint the shirts.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        "Something something something jews"

        • This guy, probably

        source
    • piccolo@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      And what agenda is that? To mine the planet in secret so not to upset the environmentalists?

      source
    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Yes, that’s how science goes. Simple explanations and definitions often fall apart upon further discovery and require caveats that sometimes even reinforce the intention.

      source

      • nexguy@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        I agree except in this instance the goal was to keep Earth’s classification important. No other scientific objective. Just seemed very geocentric to me.

        source