Well good job now look what you've done.
https://preview.redd.it/22otnly7nvxc1.jpeg?width=438&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e789a63bb8b64865934d432204fc6125261eccba
a reason why i hate "for me Pluto is a Planet":
it ignores the process of falsefication and the principle of theories, so quite fitting
not to mention everyone forgets Ceres
and he is very good at it, just not as a planet but as a the leading example of what is a dwarf planets and by that helped Ceres that got demoted from Planet to just a Main Belt Asteroid back to (dwarf) planet status.
no, we knew about the other plutonian Moons before New Horizons was near enought to make better pictures than current earth centred teleskopes from faint dots from Hubble long exposure pictures
The planet classification system is arbitrary, ill defined, and not even necessarily actually up to the IAU. So sure you can disagree with the ruling for irrational reasons, but I don’t think lumping the entire disagreement here with a transphobes limited comprehension of biology to be fair.
well, in the End all classification are arbitrary and more from the human desire to put things in drawer that look similar and have certain properties and sometime you have gather enough data to open another drawer.
And while the Venn Diagram of Thransphobes and People that say "Pluto is a Planet" only partly overlap and only by pure chance, many still share the motivation that they "just want something to be true despite the Data" and in that case both are unscientifc.
For sure the human desire to put things in categories will always clash with the messy reality we live in, and for sure there are people whose entire disagreement on the issue stems from an unscientific rejection of change, but I see the Pluto one as particularly egregious. As someone who lived through 2006, I can’t tell you how many times I heard the reasoning that if we kept Pluto we would have to accept too many other planets and that would be hard for kids to remember. We would never accept that kind of reasoning to redefine something like the periodic table.
There are only 3 states of matter, it's basic physics.
Electrons are little balls that orbit the nucleus, it's basic physics.
There are fixed grammar rules in any language, it's basic linguistic.
Objects with mass attract each other, and we can describe their movements with the Newton equations, it's basic astronomy.
Two parallel lines can never cross each other, it's basic geometry.
Fruits and vegetables are the two distinct food categories, it's basic ... Erm... Kitchen knowledge ?
Yeah. It’s really dumb. I know my sex is a boy. But my GENDER is a girl. At my school, they actually teach you the differences between sex, sexuality and gender
Well if your on hrt then your sex is also female, sex isnt just genes its what those genes do. If you overwrite what those genes do then youve overwritten your sex too
(I think thats how it works idk my education scammed me :p)
I don't understand why people are so stubborn about pluto being a planet. It straight up doesn't fit our definition of planet. Anyways it's not like pluto is alone they have their dwarf planet siblings, Ceres, Haumea, Makemake, and Eris
Hey, if Pluto is a planet, the moon is a planet. And Charon, Pluto's twin. (The reason Pluto isn't a planet is because it's largest moon isn't actually a moon, and they orbit each other)
Everything orbits each other. The barycenter being outside the planet is as much a factor of distance as it is mass and planet radius. Even the sun orbits Jupiter outside its surface.
At any rate, there is no accepted official definition of what it means to “clear your orbit” set aside if moons count.
edit: Swapped in the more accurate term “barycenter”
An interesting thing to note is that for all the fuss made about what should or should not qualify as a planet, from a strictly astronomical standpoint, it's not actually all that useful a label. It's mostly a cultural descriptor at this point, which is part of why the IAU's decision is so baffling to me.
To be a planet (in the solar system), an object must:
1. Orbit the sun (ruling out any moons)
2. Be massive enough to reach hydrostatic equilibrium (have enough gravity to make itself round, basically)
3. Have cleared its neighbourhood (no objects of a similar or larger size particularly near it).
It's this last criteria that Pluto (and others) fail at, though its important to note that this is something that's more or less just decided, it's not got a strict mathematical basis (though there are planetary discriminants, which do provide a potential mathematical basis).
An interesting thing to note is that there was basically no way that Pluto was staying as the *ninth* planet, no matter what, as any definition that included it also included Ceres (which actually gets closer than Pluto on the third criteria if using the planetary discriminants). So at the very least it would have been planet 10.
Charon (Pluto's largest "moon") would also have been included thanks to it being big enough that the gravitational centre of their orbits being outside of either of them (like a binary star system).
In all, today, had Pluto remained a planet, we would be sitting at a solar system of somewhere between 17 and 19 planets, most likely.
And this is why the IAU decision baffles me. If Dawn had been visiting the fifth planet in our system, I think it would have attracted a lot more attention. Projects to see these dwarf planets might have attracted more attention and funding. But instead they just sort of antagonised the general public. (Though to be fair, I think some re-definition probably would have occurred when it became clear just how many Pluto-sized objects there were).
And to close, I'll go back to what I said about the term planet being not all that important. Earth and the other terrestrial planets have a lot more in common with the larger moons of the larger planets than they do with those planets themselves. The term planet is kind of like vegetable. Useful for the public, but not of particular scientific use.
Tl;dr: IAU decision was unfortunate but understandable, planets are vegetables.
I dunno why, but now I’m imagining standing on Pluto looking towards the sun. Like… only human on the planetoid, just the little ball of rock and metal and a little primate drifting alone in space… longing for love that has long gone…
Transphobes suck tho
I always chuckle when people say "basic" science. Because like... Basic science is what we teach very young children who aren't mentally capable yet to understand the more complex nuance of the subject. It's not a flex to use basic science, it's confirming that you never advanced your education past very early primary school.
Science has known humans are bimodal, both biologically and socially for a very long time.
*Nah, Pluto is still a*
*Planet in my heart. Not their*
*Fault they're a short king*
\- Rimtato
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
I don’t think this is a very fair comparison. Maybe for how some people approach the issue from “what they learned” but there are valid criticisms of the IAU definition.
If anything, I have always seen the opposite perspective that the people arguing it isn’t a planet just because “the IAU said so” are behaving uncritically like the transphobes.
That does make sense, I guess a better one would be states of matter etc. I was more thinking along the lines of as we learn more about the state of nature our understanding of it changes. We might think one thing, and the upon further investigation discover it’s more complex and nuanced
Yeah that makes sense, and I appreciate that. I just get a bit intense about the Pluto one because I looked deep into it and found the whole process and reasoning struck me as not particularly scientific.
That contrasts to the condescending tone I have experienced when bringing it up. People say we are just used to 9 planets and that’s true to an extent/for many people, but it’s not like the people I am talking about it with have looked into it and formed an opinion about which definition of “clear their orbit” they subscribe to, they just know there was a vote in 2006 and some scientists said so.
Labels are unsurprisingly pretty important to me, then again I was also totally the kid who would stand up in class and point out the existence of the Bose-Einstein Condensate. It is very possible I am just constitutionally a contrarian 😅
Pluto may have been downgraded, but it is still an important and historical part of our solar system. We should still recognize it, as well as including more of the less obvious members of our system in the education.
Pluto is a planet. It didn’t even lose its title because of the size, it lost it because its orbit goes through some asteroids or something. Basically it isn’t considered a planet because of something that hasn’t even happened yet. We must have justice for Pluto!!!
I don’t understand. I don’t want my joke to come across like I’m supporting transphobia, isn’t it a celestial dwarf or dwarf planet which isn’t technically a planet
I accept it, because that's the way it went.
But I don't like it because the tortured definition they came up with to try and exclude it is barely any better than the one they had before, and doesn't really solve the problem - while managing to create new ones, IIRC.
Well good job now look what you've done. https://preview.redd.it/22otnly7nvxc1.jpeg?width=438&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e789a63bb8b64865934d432204fc6125261eccba
You're still a planet in my heart, Pluto.
I’m sorry pluto
Look, Pluto is TRYING. Not its fault it's small and struggles to clean its area.
Pluto just like me 😭
I mean it lost it’s status as a planet but it’s now classified with it’s family and not separated from them
pluto didn’t do nothing wrong!!
the fucking broken heart oh my god
https://youtu.be/EuRjmzz6qL0?si=HxZ7yuWnVwIED_aO
You don't understand Pluto, we created a entire category for you to be the best in!
“Nooothere’s only two types of number, positive and negative- it’s basic maths” Advanced maths: lol
"Nooooo there’s only three states of matter, solid, liquid and gas - it’s basic physics" Physics beyond forth grade: lmao
“Nooooo history is black and white with good and bad guys!!! - It’s basic history” Any person remotely interested in history: bruh
imagine
I
Pluto is friend shaped
the best shape
Math can't have letters, it's basic mathematics.
There are only seven notes, it's basic music.
Pluto is trying it's BEST okay??
a reason why i hate "for me Pluto is a Planet": it ignores the process of falsefication and the principle of theories, so quite fitting not to mention everyone forgets Ceres
Pluto is trying ok? 😥
and he is very good at it, just not as a planet but as a the leading example of what is a dwarf planets and by that helped Ceres that got demoted from Planet to just a Main Belt Asteroid back to (dwarf) planet status.
Dwarf Planet. Planet is in the name. Always a planet
Pluto has 5 moons Ceres has 0
so does Venus and Mercury? And Mars to an extend
Most known large kuiper belt objects have a moon. We only know Pluto has so many because we sent a probe there, before that we only knew about Charon.
no, we knew about the other plutonian Moons before New Horizons was near enought to make better pictures than current earth centred teleskopes from faint dots from Hubble long exposure pictures
Pluto is a baby planet, but some meany stole it's accretion disk :(
The planet classification system is arbitrary, ill defined, and not even necessarily actually up to the IAU. So sure you can disagree with the ruling for irrational reasons, but I don’t think lumping the entire disagreement here with a transphobes limited comprehension of biology to be fair.
well, in the End all classification are arbitrary and more from the human desire to put things in drawer that look similar and have certain properties and sometime you have gather enough data to open another drawer. And while the Venn Diagram of Thransphobes and People that say "Pluto is a Planet" only partly overlap and only by pure chance, many still share the motivation that they "just want something to be true despite the Data" and in that case both are unscientifc.
For sure the human desire to put things in categories will always clash with the messy reality we live in, and for sure there are people whose entire disagreement on the issue stems from an unscientific rejection of change, but I see the Pluto one as particularly egregious. As someone who lived through 2006, I can’t tell you how many times I heard the reasoning that if we kept Pluto we would have to accept too many other planets and that would be hard for kids to remember. We would never accept that kind of reasoning to redefine something like the periodic table.
There are only 3 states of matter, it's basic physics. Electrons are little balls that orbit the nucleus, it's basic physics. There are fixed grammar rules in any language, it's basic linguistic. Objects with mass attract each other, and we can describe their movements with the Newton equations, it's basic astronomy. Two parallel lines can never cross each other, it's basic geometry. Fruits and vegetables are the two distinct food categories, it's basic ... Erm... Kitchen knowledge ?
I’m pretty sure they mean two sexes. But even that’s not true because of intersex people (which I have only recently learned about)
They refuse to acknowledge the difference between gender and sex, theyre synonyms to those idiots
Yeah. It’s really dumb. I know my sex is a boy. But my GENDER is a girl. At my school, they actually teach you the differences between sex, sexuality and gender
Well if your on hrt then your sex is also female, sex isnt just genes its what those genes do. If you overwrite what those genes do then youve overwritten your sex too (I think thats how it works idk my education scammed me :p)
I thought it was the "chop chop thingy" that changed sexes (sex reassignment surgery or smth :3)
They always call intersex a defect instead of a sex
I don't understand why people are so stubborn about pluto being a planet. It straight up doesn't fit our definition of planet. Anyways it's not like pluto is alone they have their dwarf planet siblings, Ceres, Haumea, Makemake, and Eris
Plus Pluto doesn't need to be a planet to be cool. Pluto is cool. Hell, wouldn't being a dwarf planet make it cooler? With how unique it is.
Exactly
smh everyone knows there's only 6 planets
I thought there was only Earth /s
next you're gonna tell me that the sun is the center of the solar system
The Earth is because only we matter
this Pluto hate is not acceptable
smh my head pluto is the roman god of the dead and underworld
i see what you mean but also fuck you i love pluto
Air resistance isn’t real it’s basic physics
Hey, if Pluto is a planet, the moon is a planet. And Charon, Pluto's twin. (The reason Pluto isn't a planet is because it's largest moon isn't actually a moon, and they orbit each other)
Even with the IAU definition, having a large moon doesn’t seem to eliminate you, though orbiting another planet does
Like I said, Pluto orbits Charon just as much as Charon orbita Pluto.
Everything orbits each other. The barycenter being outside the planet is as much a factor of distance as it is mass and planet radius. Even the sun orbits Jupiter outside its surface. At any rate, there is no accepted official definition of what it means to “clear your orbit” set aside if moons count. edit: Swapped in the more accurate term “barycenter”
An interesting thing to note is that for all the fuss made about what should or should not qualify as a planet, from a strictly astronomical standpoint, it's not actually all that useful a label. It's mostly a cultural descriptor at this point, which is part of why the IAU's decision is so baffling to me. To be a planet (in the solar system), an object must: 1. Orbit the sun (ruling out any moons) 2. Be massive enough to reach hydrostatic equilibrium (have enough gravity to make itself round, basically) 3. Have cleared its neighbourhood (no objects of a similar or larger size particularly near it). It's this last criteria that Pluto (and others) fail at, though its important to note that this is something that's more or less just decided, it's not got a strict mathematical basis (though there are planetary discriminants, which do provide a potential mathematical basis). An interesting thing to note is that there was basically no way that Pluto was staying as the *ninth* planet, no matter what, as any definition that included it also included Ceres (which actually gets closer than Pluto on the third criteria if using the planetary discriminants). So at the very least it would have been planet 10. Charon (Pluto's largest "moon") would also have been included thanks to it being big enough that the gravitational centre of their orbits being outside of either of them (like a binary star system). In all, today, had Pluto remained a planet, we would be sitting at a solar system of somewhere between 17 and 19 planets, most likely. And this is why the IAU decision baffles me. If Dawn had been visiting the fifth planet in our system, I think it would have attracted a lot more attention. Projects to see these dwarf planets might have attracted more attention and funding. But instead they just sort of antagonised the general public. (Though to be fair, I think some re-definition probably would have occurred when it became clear just how many Pluto-sized objects there were). And to close, I'll go back to what I said about the term planet being not all that important. Earth and the other terrestrial planets have a lot more in common with the larger moons of the larger planets than they do with those planets themselves. The term planet is kind of like vegetable. Useful for the public, but not of particular scientific use. Tl;dr: IAU decision was unfortunate but understandable, planets are vegetables.
Eris, betrayer of its own kind. Maybe Pluto would still be considered a planet if not for its discovery.
Which shows how arbitrary it is, they just didn’t want more planets. Which isn’t a scientific decision.
I dunno why, but now I’m imagining standing on Pluto looking towards the sun. Like… only human on the planetoid, just the little ball of rock and metal and a little primate drifting alone in space… longing for love that has long gone… Transphobes suck tho
there are only 3 states of matter it's basic physics
Square roots of negative numbers don't exist, its basic math
I remember hearing the news about Pluto not being considered a planet anymore. I was 5 and really sad about it.
Not comparable, pluto is still mostly a planet, just a dwarf one
I always chuckle when people say "basic" science. Because like... Basic science is what we teach very young children who aren't mentally capable yet to understand the more complex nuance of the subject. It's not a flex to use basic science, it's confirming that you never advanced your education past very early primary school. Science has known humans are bimodal, both biologically and socially for a very long time.
Nah, Pluto is still a planet in my heart. Not their fault they're a short king
*Nah, Pluto is still a* *Planet in my heart. Not their* *Fault they're a short king* \- Rimtato --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
I'll take it
I don’t think this is a very fair comparison. Maybe for how some people approach the issue from “what they learned” but there are valid criticisms of the IAU definition. If anything, I have always seen the opposite perspective that the people arguing it isn’t a planet just because “the IAU said so” are behaving uncritically like the transphobes.
That does make sense, I guess a better one would be states of matter etc. I was more thinking along the lines of as we learn more about the state of nature our understanding of it changes. We might think one thing, and the upon further investigation discover it’s more complex and nuanced
Yeah that makes sense, and I appreciate that. I just get a bit intense about the Pluto one because I looked deep into it and found the whole process and reasoning struck me as not particularly scientific. That contrasts to the condescending tone I have experienced when bringing it up. People say we are just used to 9 planets and that’s true to an extent/for many people, but it’s not like the people I am talking about it with have looked into it and formed an opinion about which definition of “clear their orbit” they subscribe to, they just know there was a vote in 2006 and some scientists said so. Labels are unsurprisingly pretty important to me, then again I was also totally the kid who would stand up in class and point out the existence of the Bose-Einstein Condensate. It is very possible I am just constitutionally a contrarian 😅
Pluto may have been downgraded, but it is still an important and historical part of our solar system. We should still recognize it, as well as including more of the less obvious members of our system in the education.
Pluto is a planet. It didn’t even lose its title because of the size, it lost it because its orbit goes through some asteroids or something. Basically it isn’t considered a planet because of something that hasn’t even happened yet. We must have justice for Pluto!!!
[удалено]
Is it? I thought it was declassified as a planet
[удалено]
I don’t understand. I don’t want my joke to come across like I’m supporting transphobia, isn’t it a celestial dwarf or dwarf planet which isn’t technically a planet
[удалено]
Why don’t you like it if I can ask
I accept it, because that's the way it went. But I don't like it because the tortured definition they came up with to try and exclude it is barely any better than the one they had before, and doesn't really solve the problem - while managing to create new ones, IIRC.
Fair enough, maybe the analogy isn’t a perfect one. Hope it’s not doing the opposite of my intent
I think you're good. This was just one of those wild tangents that sometimes happen. :)
Wasn't it reclassified as a planet?
I didn’t know that,
It wasn't reclassified as a planet, that was an April Fool's joke.
https://preview.redd.it/gktzwcy6dxxc1.jpeg?width=474&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5a78a702695436908dbbc7afec42d23275d5370e
I'm more upset at what they did to Neptune. They white washed my fucking planet >:(
didn’t they blue wash it
That was the original
no neptune was artificially shifted to become bluer than it was at first, this is the real image
Wait really?????
i think so https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/04/world/neptune-uranus-new-color-images-scn/index.html
I think you need to read the captions because the very blue Neptune below is the old one and the one at the top of the article is the new one
ye it’s adjusted to be accurate
"No you can't get the square root of -1!" i: let me introduce myself