this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2026
904 points (97.2% liked)

Science Memes

19715 readers
441 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Planet is just not a very useful distinction. Like, Mercury, Mars, Ceres and Ganymede have more in common with each other than Jupiter or Neptune.

[–] Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I think "Planet" should be a gravitationally rounded mass that's not a star anyway. Those can be divided into rocky and gaseous, and further divided by principal composition.

Smaller than that isn't usually worth having a name, but moons can be just as interesting as free orbiting planets.

The distinction between minor and major planets is decently clear in our star system, but if we define it poorly it won't help us understand other systems or why the major ones are important. It's definitely not enough to disqualify minor planets from being full planets though. Go ahead and declare 8 major planets arbitrarily, but don't try to justify ignoring the other few dozen planetoids poorly.

[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That would make Earth-Moon a binary planet. Which I'm cool with, actually.

[–] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The barycenter of the Earth-Moon system sits well within Earth's radius. There is no definition under which the Earth-Moon system is considered binary

[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The barycentre of Sun-Jupiter system is outside of the Sun half the time. It's a really bad metric for determining that, as it depends on the distance between two bodies and not just on their relative masses.

[–] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Except Jupiter is very clearly not a star. It's an order of magnitude off of the mass required for fusion.

[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Who said anything about fusion? I thought the only thing that matters is the position of the barycentre, as you insisted?

[–] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You seriously can't really be this fucking stupid. Am I getting punked?

[–] rockerface@lemmy.cafe 1 points 2 months ago

Ah, you're just here to insult people. Good day, then.

[–] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

but don't try to justify ignoring the other few dozen planetoids poorly.

There's 200+ kuiper belt objects that are large enough to be spherical, and most don't have names

[–] Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 months ago

200+ dwarf planet candidates. Lots of them have very low densities, and most are too far away to know hardly anything about them. Pluto was only confirmed to be in hydrostatic equilibrium with New Horizons, and Quaoar has a Dwarf Planet name, but probably isn't in hydrostatic equilibrium.

It's not the specific bodies I'm worried about, it's a useful idea of a planet. Finding dozens or hundreds more of them should be exciting, not a reason to throw up our hands and disqualify them.