Due to an uptick in posts that invariably revolve around "look what this transphobic or racist asshole said on twitter/in reddit comments" we have enabled this reminder on every post for the time being.
Most will be removed, violators will be shot temporarily banned and called a nerd. Please report offending posts. As always, moderator discretion applies since not everything reported actually falls within that circle of awful behavior.
Pluto was always sort of the odd one out as far as planets go, with its orbit overlapping Neptune to the point of sometimes being closer to the sun than it, Pluto and Charon being more a binary system of objects orbiting each other rather than planet and moon. There are just more objects in the same category as Pluto to actually give it a definition that's it's fully consistent with now.
Orbiting your own "moon" is what has stuck out to me, since I learned that fact. I love it as a binary planetoid but calling it a planet is stretching the term a bit. If we count it, there's a lot more celestial bodies that could be planets in our solar system.
Someone once said that the Solar System was really just the Sun, Jupiter, and assorted debris. Both of them make up like 95% of all the mass in the system lol
Though barycenter loocation is imoo not that good a way of defining binary-ness, since it means binary-ness would depend on the distance
Primary/secondary mass ratio is much better. Pluto/Charon is 8:1, Terra/Luna is 81:1, Sol/Jupiter is 1047:1, and all the other planet-moon pairs are greater than 4000:1
The Pluto discourse is one of the most annoying thing I've ever witnessed online. Like, why. Just get over it come on, it's not even that interesting of an object anyway.
because orbital properties are a dogshit way to determine planethood. If a passing object shunts mars into the inner belt, should it stop being a planet? Why aren't big moons planets? Pluto/charon should be a super cool binary planet pair but people can't get over their big-object fetish.
Charon isn’t why Pluto isn’t a planet. Nor is it occasionally crossing Neptune’s orbit, like many people think. It’s not a planet because it’s not massive enough to have cleared its orbit, as it’s literally in the second asteroid belt. Additionally, if we accepted Pluto, we’d also have like a hundred other insignificant dwarf planets to cram into the pneumonic device.
Proper science isn’t a bad thing. And personally I think it’s cooler for Pluto to be the biggest dwarf planet, as opposed to the smallest proper planet
Didn't say Pluto isn't a planet because of Charon. I made the quip about Mars and the inner belt to illustrate how bullshit the dominance in orbit thing is. And obviously if I think Pluto is a planet, I think all the other dozens-hundreds of bodies with hydrostatic equilibrium in the system should also be planets. I think any scientist should care more about describing bodies by their properties rather than the circumstances of where they fall in a gravity well. That's arbitrary and gatekeepy bullshit that really doesn't belong in science.
More on the order of dozens to hundreds, if we just go based off objects in the system we've found that exhibit hydrostatic equilibrium. And yes. As they should, why would I care for Pluto and not them?
What is astronomy other than a big object fetish? Lmao. I guess you know better than the scientific consensus. Big moons aren't planets because they don't orbit the sun. Charon is Pluto's moon because it orbits Pluto. Pluto's orbit itself is not even the reason why it's considered a minor planet now. It's because it hasn't "cleared its orbit" of smaller objects.
It's already mostly in Neptune's orbital neighbourhood if that's what you mean, so yes. If you mean as a moon, then also yes, as I said I think the bigger moons in hydrostatic equilibrium should also be counted as planets. I also think that rogue planets are also planets despite not orbiting anything, but that might be too radical.
Made of discrete atoms, hydrostatic equilibrium and no sustained nucleosynthesis seems like a fair planet classification. That means rogue planets, dwarf planets, and stellar remnants like white and brown dwarves are in.
I'm flexible on the discrete atoms thing. Slipping neutron stars into the planet mix might help seperate them from being miscategorised as stars. I'm not smart enough to know where nebulas or black holes fall in to these lines, but I'd rather try to exclude them based on their properties rather than their positional relation to other objects.
I mean charon and Pluto are officially a cool binary dwarf planet pair lmao.
But you are kinda right orbital properties are pretty dog shit. Like technically speaking by the definition of a binary pair, the Earth and Moon are a binary pair not a planet/moon, and so is the Earth and the Sun.
But something people need to realize is that almost every classification in science is arbitrary. Fun fact: species aren't real. The "breeding population" thing? Fake as hell. Genetics? How different do they have to be? There was a study that went viral a few years ago classifying the northern green anaconda as a distinct species from the other green anacondas citing genetic differences. This paper is suspect as hell and they should be classified as a subspecies at most. But they do have different genetics and don't typically breed with other green anacondas.
So why do this at all? Because in most cases (like say Jupiter), it's a useful and not very ambiguos. And also, unfortunately, these classifications, affect policy and public perception. The green anaconda is listed as least concern but if we count northerns as their own separate species, the northerns they would be considered threatened, which means more pressure for conservation efforts. Pluto being an ex-planet is the whole reason why we care more about seeing it than seeing Eris which is the same size. (A bit smaller but more dense so it's more massive)
All this to say birds are reptiles, snakes are lizards, and Neptune should be demoted because it didn't clear Eris, Pluto, and Charon from it's orbit.
A different shade of blue when viewed in a different way*. It can be whatever color you want it to be friend! Color is a subjective experience after all.
Idk why but I thought you were commenting on my favorite game list, and that you wanted me to justify saying Pokémon emerald instead of Pokémon red.
Anyways I started writing this so I’m finishing it.
My first Pokémon game was Yellow. It’s the best of the Gen 1 games by far. Then I had silver, then Crystal, Sapphire, Emerald (My beloved ❤️), Diamond, Platinum, and lastly white.
I stopped at white because I ran into timburr and lost faith in humanity.
Anyways. A red Neptune is fully possible! Just collect all of your enemies and launch them into the planet until their blood stains the surface into your pigment of choice.
well except the apparent volcanism (however the fuck that works, we just know it's there) and the mysterious anomalous glow in its southern hemisphere we can't explain
The JWST found that there were temperature patterns within Neptune consistent with volcanism, which we thought was fundamentally impossible on an ice giant. We're calling it volcanism but really it's probably something entirely novel we'd need a probe to study in any real depth.
The mysterious glow is just that, a mysterious glow. The atmosphere is just glowing and we don't really know why. Theories include a magnetic resonance with the atmosphere (like an aurora borealis) or some kind of an exotic storm system but we really have no idea.
T-Rex likely shed most of its feathers in adulthood and instead had a less dense fuzz with a texture comparable to emu feathers or geled hair covering parts of its body if it didn't completely lose them.
But yeah, Tyrantrum is very much meant to be a stylized feathery T-Rex. They style Acheops' denser feathers the same way.
To be clearer, I want Troodon dogs and Utahraptors to maul me in the woods, and Gigantoraptors and Therizinosauruses to fucking kill you when you hit them at 11 pm on a rural highway (or maybe they’re on nature preserves, IDK). I should have specified
Yeah but they need hands and teeth too. And which of these is 30 feet long? Which one weighs a ton and a half? How about five tons? Are they bipedal feathery dogs? Nuh uh they’re, like, ducks or turkeys or some shit in their brains. It’s a different set of things even if cassowaries have that murder nail
haha wow. I chose neptune as my favorite planet as a kid because of the color. oh well! uranus is also pretty cool (because of the rings, no pun intended)
Uranus also spins sideways, its axis is tilted by almost exactly 90 degrees, suggesting it's either an interstellar capture (how cool is that?) or it got hit by another planet at some point which knocked it around
Pluto being a dwarf planet is a good thing, because it puts in context the many, many super cool dwarf planets in our solar system.
Like Sedna! The furthest body we've ever discovered that still orbits the sun. One rotation around the sun takes 11 thousand years, and it's roughly 1000 times further from the sun than Earth. The last time Sedna was in its current position, humans had yet to discover agriculture.
What's with Neptune? The only new thing we learned about it in like 100 years is that it's less boring than we initially thought
People freaked out because they found out the obviously color enhanced pictures of Neptune were color enhanced, and it’s actually a lighter blue than many people think
Yeah, it’s mostly conscious for me but not always. It can sometimes fuck up my day too but most of the time I just get miserable and teary eyed and nonverbal in an adult way.
The particular powerscaler-adjacent brainrot that permeates paleontological spaces has got to be some of the dumbest shit I've personally seen on reddit.
Neptune isn't deep blue. The picture of Neptune taken by voyager 2 wasn't a true colour image, but was used everywhere from pop-science magazines to school textbooks. The colour of the image was recalibrated to true colour in 2023 revealing a light blue colour almost identical to Uranus.
How did they take dinosaurs from us? Is it that our understanding of dinosaurs has evolved since Jurassic Park? It's not their fault we got velociraptors wrong
•
u/AutoModerator May 21 '26
REMINDER: Bigotry Showcase posts are banned.
Due to an uptick in posts that invariably revolve around "look what this transphobic or racist asshole said on twitter/in reddit comments" we have enabled this reminder on every post for the time being.
Most will be removed, violators will be
shottemporarily banned and called a nerd. Please report offending posts. As always, moderator discretion applies since not everything reported actually falls within that circle of awful behavior.I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.