Yeah they could. Once you reach the boarders of the oort cloud they can be influenced by the other stars and therefore become questionable which system they are part of. It's all hard to study since they are so small and reflect little light.
Nicely done. I was looking for a simple, clear, solar system video for children and this was one of the best. I even learned a few new things from it such as the Trojan asteroids.
Totally loved this video! You have an incredible gift of explaining complex concepts in understandable ways. However, what really amazes me is your ability to grasp a very wide range of technical subjects.
I am so glad to see people like yourself, Dave, making videos to help educate people with accurate information! In this age of limitless information, there's certainly no shortage of false information being pushed around by people such as charlatans and conspiracy theorist! We need as much accurate information to be readily available and easy to access as possible! So, please Dave, keep making these great educational videos for those who really need them!👍
Hey professor dave, I just want a little explanation. You said, due to Jupiter's strong gravity it prevents asteroids recollecting to form a planet. In that case, sun which is much more massive than jupiter, should have prevented terrestrial planets (especially Mercury) from forming in its early stages.. Why it didn't happen? Also, how did Mercury being so small is staying intact beside such a massive object. I'm no expert in astronomy, just a curious mind 😅. Thank you.
it's the difference between the sun being the center of the system and jupiter not being the center, if i understand correctly. but that's a pretty good question.
I think that the sun tries too but mercury is too far from sun to be prevented to become a planet and thus it is a planet, and any celestial object more close to sun will be engulfed by the sun due to its huge gravity. But this all is just my thought and it can be wrong.
My explanation would be the time difference. Mercury was already formed before being pulled by the sun in to mercurys present orbit. But The asteroid belt formed after the formation of jupiter. Even if we assume the accretion placed jupiter further away from the sun.
Again, great explanation tying topics together, including why there is the asteroid belt. Now I know meteor and meteorite definitions in a way I'll remember.
Epic video, however you got one thing wrong. Meteors dont burn up in the atmosphere because of friction, they burn up due to compression of air molecules since the object is moving incredibly fast
Hmm... It looks like the Trojan asteroids are within Jupiter's orbital path. Planet status REVOKED! The criteria for being a planet is so arbitrary and unstable. Also, the image at 8:10 is a long exposure of stars, not a meteor shower. You can tell because the streaks are curved around a central point. This is due to [one revision away from no longer being a planet] Earth's rotation.
'In the end stages of planet formation, a planet (as so defined) will have "cleared the neighbourhood" of its own orbital zone, meaning it has become gravitationally dominant, and there are no other bodies of comparable size other than its natural satellites or those otherwise under its gravitational influence.'
@@ProfessorDaveExplains "clear the orbit" doesn't mean having nothing in its orbit, though. It means that the planet must be gravitationally dominant and there is nothing else of comparable size. If it meant simply didn't share its orbit with any other object Earth would not be a planet either. The fact is over long periods of time Pluto's orbit is somewhat unpredictable in part due to the other objects in the Kuiper belt. The same cannot be said for Jupiter and the Trojans. Jupiter has an impact on their orbits, not the other way around.
Almost. There's no such thing as a single force by itself. Since Jupiter exerts gravitational forces on the Trojan asteroids, they also exert forces on Jupiter. The difference is that Jupiter is MUCH more massive than they are, therefore is barely affected by those forces, while the asteroids respond or accelerate much more as a result of the same amount of force. That's why Jupiter is considered "dominant".
yes exactly. cuz if they have to allow pluto then there will be too many other planets that we need to adress. how ever i still believe there is only 9 planets within our solar system
wouldn't the existence of the trojan asteroids (technically) mean that Jupiter doesn't fit the definition of a planet described in the episode, since it doesn't clear it's orbit?
No, beacause trojans are in Jupiter's and Sun's libration points, which means that they are there because Jupiter's gravity is so strong and not because it's too weak to move them aside. Besides, these asteroids make up a very, very small percentage of Jupiter's orbit by mass. You can compare that to Pluto being over ten times less massive than all the other objects in its neighborhood
Professor Dave, you say that shooting stars heat up due to friction. I remember reading that they heat up due to compression of the air in front of them, like what happens in diesel engines. Could you please clarify this.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains I am thinking that If two objects are rubbed together in a vacuum such as outer space, heat would be generated without gas compression. If a strong balloon is squeezed, the gas inside it would heat up, not from friction with the balloon , but due the move frequent collisions and possibly friction between molecules. Therefore, maybe both friction with the air, and air compression contribute to the heat. As to the degree that each contribute is another matter.
@@duttyjohncrow8706 air builds up in front of the object in the atmosphere cause because of the drag. Drag is just friction against an object that causes heat at high speed. It's the same thing with the Concord and a sonic boom and high speed. They had to account for the heat created by high speed drag flying faster than sound.
Those bodies might be beautiful out there, nevertheless, I'll feel safer when astronomers and other scientists finally develop ingenious methods of stopping or deviating could-be meteorites from crashing down on Earth!
Ummmmmm, sorry to pop your bubble or whatever, but these aren't tutorials. These are more like explanations. But good presentation quality. It really helped me study for my quiz.
Tutorial has been pigeonholed into a particular meaning in casual vernacular, particularly by video games. But if you just look at the word, you can see that it refers to something which tutors.
Great video for beginners wanting to learn as much as possible about the solar system in one sitting. I think the more we continue to explore the system we'll discover more about how bodies form and Ceres will be a unique body because of its composition.
Okay, so I'm not debating that Pluto isn't a planet. But why is there a requirement that to be a planet the object has to clear the debris from its orbital path, but Jupiter's orbit includes the Trojan asteroids? Is it just the distance between Jupiter and those asteroids?
Why is it that comets are being hailed as being icy but no one will talk about comet 67p n the landing on it? There was no ice...yet still it had a tail and etc?
Science: Pluto isn't a planet. Me: So what is it? Science: A Dwarf Planet. Me: So it's a Planet? Science: No. Me: But it's in the name. I'm starting to think you didn't think this one through.
What software do you use to make your videos? I am a teacher hoping to improve my blended instruction. I like to use other people's videos if they fit but often I need to tailor the content to the course or students I am currently teaching. Any help is appreciated! Thanks!
Hmm, probably! I don't really know. But it would make sense to me that an Oort cloud object could get jostled into a trajectory towards the inner solar system but get caught in the Kuiper belt.
1:39 - A thought about Charon... 'Ch-' in Greek has a hard 'k' sound, not a soft 'ssh-', so Charon should be pronounced 'Care-on' not 'Sharron' or 'Share-on'. There's loads of similar examples: if a word has a Greek root, 'ch-' has a hard 'k' sound, as in chemistry, charisma, chiropody, chitin, cholesterol, chelonian, and chimaera. Bugatti fell foul of this when they released their Chiron hyper-car. Chiron was a wise centaur from Greek mythology who taught heroes like Achilles and Jason, so it should be pronounced 'Kye-ron', not 'Sheer-on'. Note that 'Achilles' has a hard Greek 'ch-' in it, so it's pronounced 'Akk-illes, not 'Ash-illes'. So... The Bugatti Chiron should be 'Kye-ron'. Unfortunately, Jeremy Clarkson pronounced it 'Sheeron' because he probably thought it was French, and Clarkson (a Yorkshireman) will never admit to being wrong about anything, so everybody assumed he was correct. He wasn't, but the name stuck. French has a soft 'ch-' sound (champagne, chiffon, chassis), but you never could trust those French chappies...
Pamspirmia was idea of Sir Francis Crick. Once he realized how complex the DNA molecule really is He said the chances of life coming about on earth in the time frame proposed was impossible
It is nowhere said that these meteors are orbiting the earth. It is shown for the explanation that follows... meteors entering the atmosphere and impacting on earth.
I’m curious if someone could make an artificial hydrothermal vent or something similar, add freshwater, and add amino acids from asteroids, while simulations early earth conditions inside a closed system and see if the amino acids can form proteins or nuclei acids within the solution. If this were to be done, we could potentially create a genesis of life which would evolve independently from life currently on Earth. This could test whether panspermia could start life, though it wouldn’t confirm how our domains of life formed, it would still be very interesting to witness the genesis of life abiogenically, by creating essentially an artificial planet
Why do we as humans are always denigrating ourselves, now we denigrate planets too? The IAU should have comme up with a better system. Instead of planets and the denigrated name of “dwarf” planets. It should have been: rocky planets = type “R planet Gas giants = type “G” planet Ice giants = type “I” planet Kyler belt planets = type K planet And add types for whatever planets are found. Everyone is happy, and Pluto doesn’t loose its status, just its type
Surprise, surprise!!! There is no outer edge to the Kuiper/Oort Cloud. The empty space in between stars is full of debris... something Dark Energy/Missing Mass folk haven't realized.
It's a little more technical, those asteroids are nowhere near of comparable mass with Jupiter and their orbits are controlled by Jupiter. This is not the case with Pluto.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Thank you for taking the time to explain that. I must admit, my question was more mischievous than genuine (I mean, *someone* must have thought about it at the time) but now I know more than I did before. Thank you again.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains The IAU was not involved in establishing Pluto as a planet. I doubt it even existed at the time. They have no natural or inherent authority to control planetary status. They simply usurped the authority by self proclaimed fiat. Nearly everyone, including my favorite astronomer, Neil DeGrasse Tyson agree. But I don’t agree and nobody can make me. The proper thing would’ve been to simply give Pluto a grandfather exemption.
Um, Neil definitely does not disagree with the determination. He's an astronomer who understands the necessity for the revision of planetary determination. If you're not prepared to call several dozen or possibly several hundred other objects planets, then Pluto is not a planet. Again, nostalgia is not an argument.
@@lordvoldemort5725 Classifications are scientific when they arise naturally and organically. But here, a handful of astronomers saw there were more planets, didn’t want to include them for some reason, and so reverse engineered a definition specifically designed to achieve that desired result. That’s not science.
@@Jellyman1129 Scientific doesn’t equate to natural. Science relates to you using studies and tests to come to a conclusion regarding a specific hypothesis. Categories are scientific. Nature doesn’t use categories… science is used for that.
@@Jellyman1129 And it’s not that they saw there were more planets, it’s that they saw that there were TOO MANY objects to be considered planets, given how different those objects are. There are too many things like Pluto, but there are not so many things like the eight planets. That’s why science created categories and criteria.
@@lordvoldemort5725 The concept of “too many” is ridiculous. Do astronomers think billions of stars and galaxies in the universe is “too many”? The data is what the data is. Humans don’t get to decide how many objects a category _should_ have. Ironic that ASTRONOMERS are opposed to having an ASTRONOMICAL number of planets. 🤦🏻♂️
I love how this was explained in a way that made sense. What an incredible and intricate solar system we have,
Does the Ort Cloud interact with the “ort clouds” of other nearby stars?
I think it could, but rarely because the distances are still enormous.
No dummy
Yeah they could. Once you reach the boarders of the oort cloud they can be influenced by the other stars and therefore become questionable which system they are part of. It's all hard to study since they are so small and reflect little light.
Nicely done. I was looking for a simple, clear, solar system video for children and this was one of the best. I even learned a few new things from it such as the Trojan asteroids.
Totally loved this video! You have an incredible gift of explaining complex concepts in understandable ways. However, what really amazes me is your ability to grasp a very wide range of technical subjects.
I am so glad to see people like yourself, Dave, making videos to help educate people with accurate information!
In this age of limitless information, there's certainly no shortage of false information being pushed around by people such as charlatans and conspiracy theorist!
We need as much accurate information to be readily available and easy to access as possible! So, please Dave, keep making these great educational videos for those who really need them!👍
"Dwarf planet" when science attacks your insecurities.
how is being small an insecurity
also, I am friends with pluto, he actually always knew he was a dwarf planet, he was just waiting for scientists to realize it.
@@rebeccacummings6697 size matters
@@Q_QQ_Q if you're a planet, not really
@@rebeccacummings6697 cant have big gravity tug otherwise .
Totally just subscribed...Science well explained and digestible enough for the non science brain😂.... Awesome! 👍🏾
Nicely presented
I love how Jupiter is like the protective older brother, his gravity and mass absorb asteroids that would otherwise hit earth
It also unfortunately sends other asteroids hurling towards earth sometimes aswell.
Thank you for the video here in New York City 1:28 a.m. Friday October 16th listening and learning
Hey professor dave,
I just want a little explanation. You said, due to Jupiter's strong gravity it prevents asteroids recollecting to form a planet. In that case, sun which is much more massive than jupiter, should have prevented terrestrial planets (especially Mercury) from forming in its early stages.. Why it didn't happen? Also, how did Mercury being so small is staying intact beside such a massive object. I'm no expert in astronomy, just a curious mind 😅.
Thank you.
it's the difference between the sun being the center of the system and jupiter not being the center, if i understand correctly. but that's a pretty good question.
I think that the sun tries too but mercury is too far from sun to be prevented to become a planet and thus it is a planet, and any celestial object more close to sun will be engulfed by the sun due to its huge gravity. But this all is just my thought and it can be wrong.
My explanation would be the time difference.
Mercury was already formed before being pulled by the sun in to mercurys present orbit. But The asteroid belt formed after the formation of jupiter. Even if we assume the accretion placed jupiter further away from the sun.
Your videos are like perfection, thank you very much for the education
Asteroid belt: Who are you?
Kuiper Belt: I'm you but BIGGER
The Ort Cloud: Aww, The kids are fighting again
Since the Kuiper Belt was founded in 1992, Pluto's designation as a planet fell into jeopardy.
The kuiper belt is not an institution
Eight planets bullied number nine until he fell...
8:06 This is not a picture from a meteor shower. These are streaks from the normal night sky caused by a long exposure.
thank you prof.dave... Really good presentation!
Again, great explanation tying topics together, including why there is the asteroid belt. Now I know meteor and meteorite definitions in a way I'll remember.
Still sad about Pluto :( great video professor!!
I'm still in denial #plutoisaplanet
It's okay. Pluto is a big boy. He doesn't know or care what we call it.
lmao, you're the ones making Pluto sad, you're acting like being small is bad.
You are great personality of world astronomy
Good presentation
Good subject matter
You are working for humanity
Love your videos Professor Dave! Especially your intro... 😀
Epic video, however you got one thing wrong. Meteors dont burn up in the atmosphere because of friction, they burn up due to compression of air molecules since the object is moving incredibly fast
Helpful information
Hmm... It looks like the Trojan asteroids are within Jupiter's orbital path. Planet status REVOKED! The criteria for being a planet is so arbitrary and unstable.
Also, the image at 8:10 is a long exposure of stars, not a meteor shower. You can tell because the streaks are curved around a central point. This is due to [one revision away from no longer being a planet] Earth's rotation.
oh man i think you might be right, though it's weird as it came up for an image search of meteor shower. ah well!
'In the end stages of planet formation, a planet (as so defined) will have "cleared the neighbourhood" of its own orbital zone, meaning it has become gravitationally dominant, and there are no other bodies of comparable size other than its natural satellites or those otherwise under its gravitational influence.'
@@ProfessorDaveExplains "clear the orbit" doesn't mean having nothing in its orbit, though. It means that the planet must be gravitationally dominant and there is nothing else of comparable size. If it meant simply didn't share its orbit with any other object Earth would not be a planet either. The fact is over long periods of time Pluto's orbit is somewhat unpredictable in part due to the other objects in the Kuiper belt. The same cannot be said for Jupiter and the Trojans. Jupiter has an impact on their orbits, not the other way around.
Almost. There's no such thing as a single force by itself. Since Jupiter exerts gravitational forces on the Trojan asteroids, they also exert forces on Jupiter. The difference is that Jupiter is MUCH more massive than they are, therefore is barely affected by those forces, while the asteroids respond or accelerate much more as a result of the same amount of force. That's why Jupiter is considered "dominant".
yes exactly. cuz if they have to allow pluto then there will be too many other planets that we need to adress. how ever i still believe there is only 9 planets within our solar system
There's moons that aren't even round? Cool...
@7:45 Or to flat earthers they're know as angel farts😅
wouldn't the existence of the trojan asteroids (technically) mean that Jupiter doesn't fit the definition of a planet described in the episode, since it doesn't clear it's orbit?
@@deltarazernova that’s not how that works lol
You could argue that I believe but it's size and influence in the solar system gives it an exception. It's not a strict definition.
No, beacause trojans are in Jupiter's and Sun's libration points, which means that they are there because Jupiter's gravity is so strong and not because it's too weak to move them aside. Besides, these asteroids make up a very, very small percentage of Jupiter's orbit by mass. You can compare that to Pluto being over ten times less massive than all the other objects in its neighborhood
Great summary!
Can you perhaps talk about Sedna. That would be cool.
does Neptune prevent kuiper belt objects from collecting?
Professor Dave, you say that shooting stars heat up due to friction. I remember reading that they heat up due to compression of the air in front of them, like what happens in diesel engines. Could you please clarify this.
i think that's kind of the same thing, no?
@@ProfessorDaveExplains I am thinking that If two objects are rubbed together in a vacuum such as outer space, heat would be generated without gas compression. If a strong balloon is squeezed, the gas inside it would heat up, not from friction with the balloon , but due the move frequent collisions and possibly friction between molecules. Therefore, maybe both friction with the air, and air compression contribute to the heat. As to the degree that each contribute is another matter.
@@duttyjohncrow8706 air builds up in front of the object in the atmosphere cause because of the drag. Drag is just friction against an object that causes heat at high speed. It's the same thing with the Concord and a sonic boom and high speed. They had to account for the heat created by high speed drag flying faster than sound.
It's an acceptable visualization, but if that shot at 8:08 isn't a long-exposure shot of star trails, I'm the virgin Mary.
Amazing video series
So glad this was in my recommendation well explained thank you ✨👍🏻
Was Pluto classified as a planetoid because of the eccentricity of its sidereal orbital path or its miniscule size?
Subscribed. Any about alien, ufo, black holes.
very informative
This stuff makes me so sad. We'll never get out of our solar system. It's just too big.
Those bodies might be beautiful out there, nevertheless, I'll feel safer when astronomers and other scientists finally develop ingenious methods of stopping or deviating could-be meteorites from crashing down on Earth!
Ummmmmm, sorry to pop your bubble or whatever, but these aren't tutorials. These are more like explanations. But good presentation quality. It really helped me study for my quiz.
Those are synonyms, kiddo.
Tutorial has been pigeonholed into a particular meaning in casual vernacular, particularly by video games. But if you just look at the word, you can see that it refers to something which tutors.
If I remember correctly a red dwarf star, I know flew through your Oort cloud some 70,000 years ago.
Thanks dave, very helpful bridge for homeschool curricula. For the complainers, just make your own channel already... geez louise
Excellent ! 👍👍👍
I love Pluto and goofy.
Great video
What about the oort cloud?
Sticks to the facts, sober, clear and to the point. It's more informative than some pathetic 'exlosives driven' docu's from Nat Geo.
Great video! I've been pronouncing Kuiper Belt wrong all these years... 😬
I wouldn't take this series as gospel. The facts are sound, but a lot of pronunciations are off.
@@FireheadLazzo To be fair I mispronounce things in English and French all the time. These are my languages and I suck at them... 😁
@@anikmonette2140 That's fair. It happens to everyone. I'm just saying that this video is probably not a great source for correcting yourself.
@@FireheadLazzo Gotcha! ; )
wow, you're illiterate
Professor Dave is my g
8:00 I'm seeing the video on the day where King of the meteor shower(Geminids) peaks😁
Shouldnt Sedna be a planet as it has cleared out its orbit( at the very edge of the Kuiper belt 150 ish AU away).
Its round.
And it orbits our sun.
If IAU definition is logical, a red dwarf star orbiting a giant star could be defined as not a star...
Great video for beginners wanting to learn as much as possible about the solar system in one sitting. I think the more we continue to explore the system we'll discover more about how bodies form and Ceres will be a unique body because of its composition.
Okay, so I'm not debating that Pluto isn't a planet. But why is there a requirement that to be a planet the object has to clear the debris from its orbital path, but Jupiter's orbit includes the Trojan asteroids? Is it just the distance between Jupiter and those asteroids?
So how close is the Oort cloud to Alpha centauri? & if it is closer, than to the Sun, how come it does not surround Alpha Centauri instead?
Nowhere near.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains That's what I thought. Your diagram is presumably not to scale then.
Yeah it's a logarithmic scale, check out the axis.
than ku prof🛑
Do other galaxies have Oort clouds and Kuiper belts? Are they called with other names?
during lyrid meteor shower in our country.. one of them became meteorite
Why is it that comets are being hailed as being icy but no one will talk about comet 67p n the landing on it? There was no ice...yet still it had a tail and etc?
Science: Pluto isn't a planet.
Me: So what is it?
Science: A Dwarf Planet.
Me: So it's a Planet?
Science: No.
Me: But it's in the name. I'm starting to think you didn't think this one through.
What software do you use to make your videos? I am a teacher hoping to improve my blended instruction. I like to use other people's videos if they fit but often I need to tailor the content to the course or students I am currently teaching. Any help is appreciated! Thanks!
adobe after effects!
@@ProfessorDaveExplains is there a possibility that the rocks found in the kuiper belt will travel to the oort cloud and vice versa?
Hmm, probably! I don't really know. But it would make sense to me that an Oort cloud object could get jostled into a trajectory towards the inner solar system but get caught in the Kuiper belt.
My brain fails to rap around this
1st visit.
Nice going.
Good luck
Excellent
Is there any rocks older then 4.6 million years old in our solar system?
What happened to Planet Nubiru? And do we live in a binary solar system?
Not a thing, and no.
nubiru? Wtf is that and you would see 2 suns if it was a binary solar system
1:39 - A thought about Charon... 'Ch-' in Greek has a hard 'k' sound, not a soft 'ssh-', so Charon should be pronounced 'Care-on' not 'Sharron' or 'Share-on'. There's loads of similar examples: if a word has a Greek root, 'ch-' has a hard 'k' sound, as in chemistry, charisma, chiropody, chitin, cholesterol, chelonian, and chimaera.
Bugatti fell foul of this when they released their Chiron hyper-car. Chiron was a wise centaur from Greek mythology who taught heroes like Achilles and Jason, so it should be pronounced 'Kye-ron', not 'Sheer-on'.
Note that 'Achilles' has a hard Greek 'ch-' in it, so it's pronounced 'Akk-illes, not 'Ash-illes'.
So... The Bugatti Chiron should be 'Kye-ron'. Unfortunately, Jeremy Clarkson pronounced it 'Sheeron' because he probably thought it was French, and Clarkson (a Yorkshireman) will never admit to being wrong about anything, so everybody assumed he was correct. He wasn't, but the name stuck.
French has a soft 'ch-' sound (champagne, chiffon, chassis), but you never could trust those French chappies...
Doesnt those trojan asteroids on Jupiters exact orbit path mean Jupiter hasn't cleared its orbit of debris?
Interesting!
How Does My Rings Form?
awsm explanation
Asteroids don't concern me, I want that ship, not excuses!
why pluto doesn't hit anything in the kuiper belt
Pamspirmia was idea of Sir Francis Crick. Once he realized how complex the DNA molecule really is He said the chances of life coming about on earth in the time frame proposed was impossible
Nope. That's wrong in several ways simultaneously. Visit my James Tour debunk if you want to learn about abiogenesis.
7:15 wrong picture. there is no way for any objects to orbit each other at such a distance from Earth.
I think that's just an illustration, it's not suppose to be taken as a fact.
Jean isn’t it a science channel?
It is nowhere said that these meteors are orbiting the earth. It is shown for the explanation that follows... meteors entering the atmosphere and impacting on earth.
amazing
I’m curious if someone could make an artificial hydrothermal vent or something similar, add freshwater, and add amino acids from asteroids, while simulations early earth conditions inside a closed system and see if the amino acids can form proteins or nuclei acids within the solution. If this were to be done, we could potentially create a genesis of life which would evolve independently from life currently on Earth. This could test whether panspermia could start life, though it wouldn’t confirm how our domains of life formed, it would still be very interesting to witness the genesis of life abiogenically, by creating essentially an artificial planet
Meteorite Kuiper Diamonds
Why do we as humans are always denigrating ourselves, now we denigrate planets too?
The IAU should have comme up with a better system. Instead of planets and the denigrated name of “dwarf” planets. It should have been:
rocky planets = type “R planet
Gas giants = type “G” planet
Ice giants = type “I” planet
Kyler belt planets = type K planet
And add types for whatever planets are found. Everyone is happy, and Pluto doesn’t loose its status, just its type
*Pluto*
+ Roman God of The Underworld
+ Mickey Mouse’s Dog
- NOT a planet
1:25 It’s smaller than our moon
2:53 Lets refer to it as a Dwarf Planet
Mercury is a Dwarf Planet too (Just not officially).
i thought a planet orbited a sun and a moon orbited a planet
correct
This is what I call Reality TV!
i want pluto back like leave pluto a planet
Surprise, surprise!!! There is no outer edge to the Kuiper/Oort Cloud. The empty space in between stars is full of debris... something Dark Energy/Missing Mass folk haven't realized.
Not as dense as the Oort cloud though. Nobody said that interstellar space is 100% empty. It has nothing to do with dark energy.
show us all your videos now, i know you hide them!11
i release these one per week, have patience!
I don't care what science says, Pluto will ALWAYS be a planet to me!
If there are Trojan asteroids in Jupiter's orbit, then surely Jupiter hasn't cleared its neighbourhood, so it's not a planet.
It's a little more technical, those asteroids are nowhere near of comparable mass with Jupiter and their orbits are controlled by Jupiter. This is not the case with Pluto.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Thank you for taking the time to explain that. I must admit, my question was more mischievous than genuine (I mean, *someone* must have thought about it at the time) but now I know more than I did before. Thank you again.
Did you hear about Pluto? That's messed up.
So Jupiter didn’t clear its path of Trojan Asteroids? Why is Jupiter a planet?
It as something to do with the resonance, that they are locked in that orientation. There is debris of some kind in every planetary orbit.
Why is jupiter considered a planet if it has so many asteroids in its orbit?
It's a planet, not a star. Planets can have satellites of their own
@@rheiagreenland4714 not sure why i made this stupid ass comment but thank you for the reply nonetheless
Pluto will be a planet again. Someday all the Pluto haters will be gone and we can have our Pluto back. Don't hate Pluto.
I reject the IAU’s demotion of Pluto’s planetary status. I don’t recognize their authority to decide the issue.
Tough turkey.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains lol, I’m old enough to remember when in America people were allowed to have differing opinions!
This isn’t a matter of “opinion”. Pluto objectively is not a planet, and your feelings of nostalgia do not qualify as a scientific argument.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains The IAU was not involved in establishing Pluto as a planet. I doubt it even existed at the time. They have no natural or inherent authority to control planetary status. They simply usurped the authority by self proclaimed fiat. Nearly everyone, including my favorite astronomer, Neil DeGrasse Tyson agree. But I don’t agree and nobody can make me. The proper thing would’ve been to simply give Pluto a grandfather exemption.
Um, Neil definitely does not disagree with the determination. He's an astronomer who understands the necessity for the revision of planetary determination. If you're not prepared to call several dozen or possibly several hundred other objects planets, then Pluto is not a planet. Again, nostalgia is not an argument.
Planet Maldek
2:36 But…why not add more planets? They’re very common around other stars, so why does our system need to have a limit? It’s very anti-scientific. 😑
It’s not anti-scientific. Classifications are VERY scientific. They use these same criteria when looking at other objects that orbit other stars.
@@lordvoldemort5725 Classifications are scientific when they arise naturally and organically. But here, a handful of astronomers saw there were more planets, didn’t want to include them for some reason, and so reverse engineered a definition specifically designed to achieve that desired result. That’s not science.
@@Jellyman1129 Scientific doesn’t equate to natural. Science relates to you using studies and tests to come to a conclusion regarding a specific hypothesis. Categories are scientific. Nature doesn’t use categories… science is used for that.
@@Jellyman1129 And it’s not that they saw there were more planets, it’s that they saw that there were TOO MANY objects to be considered planets, given how different those objects are. There are too many things like Pluto, but there are not so many things like the eight planets. That’s why science created categories and criteria.
@@lordvoldemort5725 The concept of “too many” is ridiculous. Do astronomers think billions of stars and galaxies in the universe is “too many”? The data is what the data is. Humans don’t get to decide how many objects a category _should_ have. Ironic that ASTRONOMERS are opposed to having an ASTRONOMICAL number of planets. 🤦🏻♂️
By My Own Millions of Moons Torn Apart or Ripped Apart into Debris and Particles By Ring of Gravity of Me Called Roche Limit and Thus My Rings Formed
I don’t care about a dog lol. Pluto is a Planet.
Comets are my worst enemy, they will end us
Size Matters
Uranus and Neptune are not gas giants
Interstellar space is not in our milky way galaxy
The word interstellar means between stars. So yes, it is.
yOu'Re thinking intergalactic