This was high quality as it got for so long. Imagine waiting for, I think it was 9 years, for the New Horizon project to reach Pluto. It was worth it though, we all wanted to know what it looked like, and what a beautiful planet it was.
@@Snorlax-zw9gc We got images from NASA who states they are of Pluto. Considering the equipment available when devices needed to send such a photo didn't exist for another ten years after the launch. nor is it possible for the existing radio antenna array to receive a signal from a device designed so long ago even possible. NASA being the only available source of data can state anything they wish, no one can prove them incorrect, well except for actual comparison of data available during the era it was sent on its voyage and the era is was supposedly received.
@@maxliu7576 Good point, that would change it verbally (although you could argue that the first "h" in "haych" is semi-silent). But within text, it wouldn't change, it would still be "an".
@@PGraveDigger1 tbh when the H is pronounced i find that ppl use 'an' moreso, not less. I've seen "an history". so, this argument is basically barking up a nothing tree.
@@Haliya. Sounds like a reasonable speculation. I don't think they had to foresee much, because Eris caused enough chaos in their own view on Pluto and it's surroundings.
And now Uranus and Neptune aren't considered Gas Giants anymore but actually Ice Giants (as you probably know, this is a old video) but just interesting to see how our understanding is ever changing.
Indeed. Unlike Jupiter and Saturn, which-just like stars-are comprised almost entirely of hydrogen and helium (but are actually much too small to *become* stars), Uranus and Neptune have a very different constitution. Rather, they're both made up of ammonia, methane, and water. The last of which is kept under such high pressure by the other two that never evaporates despite reaching temperatures of more than 350°F. Only an astrophysicist could ever get away with calling *boiling water* "ice."
Also Neptune sometimes goes into the Kuiper belt so hasnt cleared its neighbourhood (one of the IAU's three criteria for a planet), this isnt even talking about any of the asteroids orbiting at Jupiter's L4 and L5 points (they are called Trojan asteroids). Also Uranus and Neptune are considered Jovian planets (same with Jupiter and Neptune) which then go to 2 sub categories as you said
Weird, in Spain it was taught that there was two groups, the terrestrial planets and gas planets, the gas planets can be divided by gas giants and ice planets
+Cameron Ballard: That won't help you -- since Eris scientists have found several 'dwarf planets' in the Kuiper Belt that are larger than Pluto and they'll keep finding more for quite some time
To this day, there is no Kuiper Belt Object bigger than Pluto. Eris is the only object to have a higher mass and comparable size. Based on outdated estimations, Eris was supposedly bigger than Pluto, but New Horizons discovered that Pluto actually had a bigger diameter, if only by 50 km. the other three dwarf planets, which are also the biggest non-planetary objects in the solar system, are 963 km (Ceres), 1502 km (Makemake) and 1920x1540x990 km (Haumea, ellipsoid shape); compared to 2326 km (Eris) and 2374 km (Pluto). The only object that could be bigger than Pluto would be a Planet Nine or a stray object that hasn't been found yet.
And it’s much larger than everything immediately around it. I find it entertaining in astronomy books that have Ceres on one side, and the asteroids on the other. But Ceres is special to me for being the only dwarf planet on this side of the Kepler belt :)
ok maybe they are bigger resolution, but just go to google maps (they have planet-viewing mode). you cant really even see the craters (only the biggest ones)
@Gwyneth Yeo Bing Wen Student yea ik but they are not really high def tbh (unless you can find the GOOD ones cuz google only shows me the blobs or artwork [check if the picture is artist impression or sth cuz its very common])
Fun fact about Pluto: U could wrap Russia around Pluto and have leftover parts of Russia! Surface area of Pluto ♇: 16647940km^2 Surface area of 🇷🇺: 17098322km^2
@@Onixstar They'll likely never collide because Neptune and Pluto are in 2:3 resonant orbits, every 2 orbits of Pluto, Neptune does 3. Because of this, the two will never get close to each other.
It reminds me of that one Rick and Morty episode where Jerry refuses to accept that Pluto isn’t a plannet cause "you can’t just change science" when change is the whole point of science
To a point, the word “planet” is a human invention and open to interpretation, so this is literally astronomers changing science. A planet isn’t like a hydrogen atom: there is no disagreement as to what an atom is or its structure. The word “planet” suffers from the same issue as “continent”: no real formal definition. Astronomers decided that a planet has to be round (its characteristics allow it to be as such), under the influence of a star, and “cleared the neighborhood” around its orbit. But this last condition was conveniently added to justify the recategorization and it’s not something that the cosmos has. Jupiter, for example, has trojan asteroids in its orbit (in front and back). Is that “cleared the neighborhood”? What about the near-Earth objects (like asteroids) that come close to Earth or even orbit Earth? What other Pluto-sized objects orbit close to Pluto that its orbit is not cleared? So, yes...science changes when discoveries are made. For this, however, it was just astronomers making a list even more exclusive but nothing else has changed (Pluto still orbits the Sun, still preserves its characteristics, still has a circular orbit (compared to other KB objects), and is among the bigger objects beyond Neptune).
@@einsteinboricua *>"Jupiter, for example, has trojan asteroids in its orbit (in front and back). Is that “cleared the neighborhood”? What about the near-Earth objects (like asteroids) that come close to Earth or even orbit Earth? What other Pluto-sized objects orbit close to Pluto that its orbit is not cleared?"
+Dhruv Verma i doubt it highly cause i constantly get non skippable amazon ads like 60% of the time no matter what the content also i have used amazon maybe twice in my entire life and bought sonething off it just once so i don't think i should get allthose amazon ads.
Would it had been creepy if the New Horizons probe took a closeup picture of Pluto and it looked exactly like the pixelated low-resolution mush that the Hubble Telescope took?
knight wing I was imagining a Truman Show like scenario though, if all the distant objects in the sky are just low-resolution printouts fabricated by an observing alien race.
I had a science test right as the debate over the upcoming switch came up. "How many planets orbit the sun?" I wanted to strangle the test proctor. How am I supposed to know if its a planet when *scientists* are still discussing if it's a planet?!
Barley Sixseventwo What's worse is if you're gonna answer the correct answer that you know, or the follow the outdated curriculum which many (lazy) teachers just follow without research.
There isn't any debate any more. Pluto isn't a planet. We found things like pluto but bigger so include those or just accept that pluto isn't a planet.
@@Minny_curryEDITS The Belters, a faction of space-based asteroid dwellers from the sci-fi TV and book series The Expanse, have a large presence on Ceres. In their language (lang Belta) "Belter" is "Belta", and "people" is "lowda", so "people of the Belt" is Beltalowda. They have entered the chat because they are frustrated that one of their most significant bases is being cited as a place no one has heard of.
3:25 "This problem could be ignored as long as no one found an ice ball bigger than Pluto. Which is exactly what happened in 2006 with the Discovery of Eris." Eris is larger by mass, but the New Horizons mission showed us that Pluto is in-fact bigger by volume. If sheer size was the predominant factor for demoting Pluto, that reason might not be enough anymore... because as of now Pluto is the largest object (at least by volume) beyond Neptune.
At the time Pluto was demoted, NH had just been launched so there was no way to prove this until the spacecraft reached the destination. At this point, it’s not mass, volume, or size what matters but rather whether Pluto “has cleared the neighborhood of its orbit”. The answer is no, which is why Pluto is a dwarf planet.
good lesson in both history and science! Basically, nationalistic Americans (including some astronomers) pushed Pluto as a major planet in the public news media, and those many who questioned Pluto as a major planet in the decades following its discovery in 1930 didn't care enough to make a big deal of challenging it; there were other "more important" things to tackle, and besides, actual physical information on Pluto was simply lacking until its first satellite Charon was discovered in the late 1970s.... Some of the most-used university astronomy textbooks in the 1930s and 1940s actually posited Pluto more as a minor planet. Disney apparently had a lot to do with entrenching Pluto in the American consciousness. But it always was a silly school exercise to memorize "nine major planets" (or even eight!) ...
Well, There can be a 9 planet, actually, the guy who discovered Ceres is actually the guy who discovered that can be a nine planet by the end of the Kuiper Belt, so, the 9 planet, with the size of Neptune should be the king or queen of the Kuiper Belt.
Eileen Liew TRUE i think this is the perfect way to go , there are few entertaining teachers that become successful as famous good teachers in schools.
This was incredibly well done, I am surprised I haven't seen this presented this way before. It certainly makes the asteroid belt more interesting knowing it previously had planets within it.
@@harrystone3527 No, because europa has underwater oceans, there's a chance that in the water there is life, so the joke is that aliens are saying "attempt no landings here"
MayuriKurotsuchi Even when I was a theist, I knew how tiny the Earth was in the Solar System. It was presented to me in an "if the Earth were a tennis ball, then Jupiter would be a beach ball X number of miles away, and the Sun would be something much larger else N number of miles away. It's when you realize that the Sun is one of *ten thousand million trillion stars*, and that the distance to the *nearest* of those stars is *25 trillion trillion miles* (41 trillion trillion km) -- much less the distance to the other end of the Milky Way, or even Andromeda our nearest neighbor Galaxy, which is *12 thousand trillion trillion miles away*) on top of how minuscule the Earth is in the Solar System that you realize how -- in the grand scheme of things -- utterly insignificant we are.
I haven't done the math, but you might be right. I know that our moon has roughly the same surface area as Australia, and Pluto is smaller than our moon, so it's definitely possible that a country on Earth might have a larger surface area than Pluto.
Watching this in the year 2018, after the New Horizons flyby of Pluto, it's insane how much better pictures we have of Pluto now. My mind is just completely blown by this.
I don't understand why people consider the label 'planet' as some sort of status symbol. The point of these labels is to classify groups of objects with similar characteristics together and allow for differentiation between other classifications. People act as if some insult was dealt to Pluto by its current classification.
+Francesco Magnoni The case may be that some people care more for a lifeless ball of ice 7.5 billion kilometres away than they do for many of the issues on our own planet with real people who feel and experience them...
Toby Martin it's easier to talk about insignificant and far away things rather than issues abuot which everybody has conflicting opinions and hard feelings. if i just meet someone, i'd rather talk about weather than about cancer.
Francesco Magnoni That much is true. Obviously I have no qualm about people discussing planets! But when people get riled over the status of Pluto as if it's been personally offended...
+violacrb You are not one of us. This is not directly an insult but that doesn't mean it can't make you feel sad or excluded. And for those of us that grew up with Pluto being one of planet buddies that is basicly what those mean scientist guys have been telling us about Pluto. Not one of us not a planet.
That was incredibly helpful! Gosh why didn’t they just start with The Kuiper belt in school and use that as a starting point to then break the news that we were wrong about Pluto.
My school did in the mid 90's. We learned about the keiper belt (also pluto as a planet). But my teacher would refer to pluto as a "Neptunian Object" much more than a planet. And explained "there were many neptunian objects beyond neptune". He was a head of his time as a teacher.
There should be no debate, there are certain requirements needed to be classified as a planet. 1. Must orbit the sun, Pluto does this 2. Must be formed into a sphere under it's own gravity, Pluto has done this 3. Must clear it's orbit of other bodies, this is where Pluto fails to meet the classification, there are thousands of other bodies nearly the size of Pluto or larger in it's orbit.
But seeing as those "classifications" were made up after it was called a planet. It's like telling a midget they are a person and then saying later they aren't.
bromixsr But our definition was flawed from the beginning. Planet is far to broad a term to classify the objects in our solar system, if we did not change the definition there would be hundreds of thousands of planets in our solar system, a separate classification for dwarf planets is a good idea.
bromixsr The more we discover, the more differences we find. The more differences we find, the more we need to categorize. Your logic suggests that we should still call the world "flat".
GuiltyMiner0343 I can agree with acceptation to 3- I would add an and/or "Is absorbing nearby masses into itself (smaller bodies)." Pluto still would not meet the requirement, but planets in the final stages of forming or with rings would pass.
Well done. I can understand Pluto defenders 'hearkening back to their youth' but the position of 9 planets seems untenable. We either have 8 or we have 15 or 20 (with more added every year).
This video, though informative, leaves out a crazy important detail : The International Astronomical Union in 2006 defined a planet as a celestial body that : a) Is in orbit around the Sun. b) Has sufficient body mass for its self gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium shape, i.e. nearly round in shape. c) Has cleared the neighborhood around its orbit. Now, Pluto can't clear objects out of its path. Hence its called a dwarf planet.
+chorosso They are the ones which either do not have gravitational boundation with a star or have been thrown off from their orbit. I don't know the definition though.
The three criteria for planetdom, are 1, it must be spherical, 2, it must have a regular orbit around the sun, and 3, it must have cleared its path of orbit. so because pluto is in the Kuiper belt, it has not cleared its orbit, and is therefore not a planet, and is instead a dwarf planet
I think that he meant to say that the object must have a greater mass than all the other objects within its orbital path. Since Pluto is small and within the Kuiper belt this isn't the case.
the problem with that rule is since pluto is located in the kuiper belt, it would need a giant ass gravity to clear it's neighborhood, so high, even Earth wouldn't be able to do it, so how is thay fair? On top of that Neptune also has multiple aestroids in its orbit so it should be considered a dwarf planet? This is when the rule is slightly messed up
Earth isn't located in the Kuiper belt though, it's in the "Earth belt". Earth shares this area of the solar system with a handful of asteroids and the Moon. The difference between Earth & Neptune and bodies in the kuiper belt like Pluto is that both of those planets dominate their "belts". Pluto comes nowhere close to being the dominant force in the Kuiper belt. So "Clearing its orbit" really means "Clearing its orbit of competing bodies". Hope that helps.
it's not arbitrary tho? it's a way for humans to categorize things to make them more manageable and relevant to study, all of the things labeled in this video are solar bodies in our solar system, and we keep breaking them down to more and more specific taxonomies, solar bodies to plants or dwarf plants or moons etc, then they're described more specifically as terrestrial planets or gas giants or what have you, and then you describe them as their name, these definitions are useful for studying properties and determining properties of like objects we can't study as directly
We discovered new information and were faced with three choices. A) Introduce dozens of new planets. B) Leave it at 9 planets, but give up any meaning the word planet has. C) Demote Pluto. We picked C.
No Science has never said anything that's been proven false. Babies DON'T feel pain. The Earth IS flat. It's obvious that the first thing Science says is always right
In your HEART? OMG the stupidity.......Will you please explain to me why being called a "planet" one day and then a "dwarf planet" the next is perceived by so many of you to be a "demotion" at all? Why is simply being called a planet "better" than being called a dwarf planet? A giant ball of rock and ice that's 8 LIGHT HOURS from the Sun DOES NOT give two shits what human beings call it.
The three criteria that defines a planet: 1. Spherical under own gravity - Check 2. Main body of orbit around star (excludes moons) - Check 3. Object dominates its orbit - Pluto fails
Actually, it doesn't. It's only a few percent bigger than pluto, and neither of them are massive enough to "clear" their neighbourhood from other smaller objects (unlike Earth which contains over 99.99% of the mass of where it orbits). You misunderstood the second criteria (maybe cus I phrased it poorly). It is an official definition by IAU
Christopher Bradley Eris is a planet. Why is that a problem? It is now believed to be marginally smaller than Pluto though 27 percent more massive, which means more rocky and therefore more planet-like.
Though I'm the kind of person who subscribes to the notion of 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it', I agree with the reclassification of Pluto. With the discovery of Eris, Sedna and others, the list of planets would have ballooned out of control. Before 2006, no one had seriously considered what truly distinguishes a planet from other large-ish celestial bodies like Ceres in the asteroid belt. A line had to be drawn, and the International Astronomical Union did just that. We now have a stable list of bodies that covers all the 'main' ones in our solar system and excludes objects which are not large or 'special' enough.
A line did not have to be drawn. There is absolutely no scientific basis to artificially limiting the number of solar system planets to a low number. We already know the universe has billions of galaxies, many of which have billions of stars. Would we say Jupiter can't have 67 moons because kids can memorize only four? Memorization is not important to learning; what is important is understanding the different types of planets and their characteristics. If our solar system has 50-100 planets, then that is what it has. Why distinguish bodies like Ceres or Pluto from the larger planets when they share the same characteristics as those planets with the only difference being they are smaller versions of them? Also, we do not have a stable list of main planets because the IAU decision is contested by many astronomers, and there is no consensus in the field one way or the other.
It was politically convenient to preserve the memoriseable, small 'club' of planets. Personally, my concept -- and daresay many peoples' concept -- of the word 'planet' is a large body, one of a few rather than one of millions. You do, however, make some good points: convenience of memorising is not, in the grand scheme of things, important
plusplusplusplusp Thank you! I think we are going through a paradigm shift. The rapid discovery of exoplanets means it's only a matter of time before planets, like stars, number in the billions when we consider just our galaxy alone, never mind other galaxies! The reaction of the public and of many astronomers to what might have been a politically convenient position has not generally been positive. People like the idea of adding new planets and dislike taking planets away. As I'm sure you know, the term "large body" is very relative. Earth is hardly "large" compared to Jupiter, and the Sun is hardly large compared to some of the giant stars. Eventually, we will have to view the concept of planet based on subcategories such as terrestrial, jovian, dwarf, etc., with "large enough" meaning the object is large enough to be rounded by its own gravity.
I’ve never noticed this until now but I think it’s important to point out that you spelled “Kuiper” wrong at 3:38. Although I would love to see a Kupier belt as well :)
SSSSSHHHHT! If the international astronomical union gets wind of this they may decide they will rename the Kuiper belt as well. Do you think their havoc, madness, and pandemonium will stop at Pluto? Do not give them any ideas! They will not rest until all is chaos, confusion, and commotion.
I think it's cool that in Sailor Moon, they have Sailor Soldiers for all the planets, and the moon, Pluto, Ceres, Vesta, Pallas and Juno. It's a big party.
And the only way to save the planet is by making high school girls Superheroes. The reason they give is just made up a little bit into the series. And it's just an excuse to let the animators draw naked high school girls.
Well, I think that discovering that it was just a part of the Kuiper belt and not a lone body that scientists just arbitrarily wanted to re-classify makes more sense. I had wondered why, since I had always been told that Pluto affected planetary movement, that the classification of 'planet' was dependent on size. Thanks for the explanation, it's the only one that I've seen so far that has broken it down so easily.
Pallas, Ceres, Pluto, Eris, the other names he mentioned, and several more, aren't asteroids or anything like that. They've been re-named dwarf-planets, which in my opinion is still a planet I will continue to acknowledge them as such.
That, and the small bit with Galileo was inaccurate, but the video's not really about history. Some things we have to let slide sometimes, though you're not wrong for pointing them out.
Great video as always. But I would like to have heard something about the different suggested definitions of planet, like "has cleared its orbit of any debris"
The ancient Greeks weren't trying to classify natural kinds by introducing the word, "planet", i.e., "planetes". All it meant, literally, was "wanderer" or "wandering thing". It was a wanderer, a planet, if it didn't (appear to) move in unison with the "fixed" stars. That's it. Calling a number of things "planets" was not at the same time assuming they were all similar in some important way, except in that they appeared to have paths of motion discordant with the appearance of the unified motion of the stars. When it came to actually theorizing the nature of the wanderers, they regarded the sun as very different in nature than the moon, and some regarded the proper planets they could see as very different in nature than the sun and the moon. Their use of the term "planetes" is still accurate, in a sense. All of the sun, moon, proper planets, and asteroids, still (appear to) move in paths different than that of the "fixed" stars. Can't blame the ancient Greeks for introducing a bad concept. The problem, if there is one, goes back to Copernicus and Galileo. Once they recognized that the earth and the wandering planets orbit the sun, and, with Galileo, started believing that the earth, moon, and wandering planets were all made out of the same stuff, then, boom, the word "planet" becomes a kind term. I'd guess, it's a fairly educated guess, that right around that time, the concept associated with "planet", in whatever language, is roughly just any large, spherical conglomeration of corpuscles, or little bits of matter, orbiting the sun. It's right about there, I'd figure, that our modern concept of a planet emerges, with whatever problems it may have. Then, again, I think all the hoopla surrounding reclassifying Pluto was tedious anyway. A couple of scientists with psychological problems getting a kick out of telling people they're dumb to think Pluto is really a planet, even though they've been told that all their lives. I say we go back to the ancient Greek concept. We call anything not a star, in the region of our solar system, a planet, and then let scientists introduce cool new terms to categorize planets as befits their research interests. Just my two cents.
***** Perhaps you missed the point of my remarks. That may be my fault. That was an awfully long comment. At the end I said we should let scientists introduce new terminology that more precisely reflects their (scientific) interests. Redefining "planet", a term that has such ubiquitous use in ordinary discourse, is lame. Why play around with a word with such a long history of a wide variety of uses? Give it up. Let it go. Define it loosely for ordinary use, and let scientists offer new terminology that more accurately reflects the present state of our knowledge.
ClockCutter So, those scientists have psychological problems for redefining planet to mean something different from what people have been taught. Your solution then is to adopt a definition of planet that's different from what people have been taught? Gotcha.
+Xianaic it was just the Greeks seeing "wish those dots wander", referring to the fact that the stars move together but the planets move completely differently from our sights, wander becomes plane and wanderer becomes planet. It's really our fault for never translating the names to keep them ambiguous. Respect Pluto's dwarf pronouns, capitalist pigs.
ani_veanohi "Terra," and, "Terran," are used in a lot of Sci-Fi works as an alternative to Earth, because that's just another name for it, but, for what it's worth, "Terran," will always mean those little, blue bastards to me, too :D
I always wondered (Once I got out of gradeschool and learned how things really were) what set Pluto apart from all the other things there, that it stood out when first discovered as opposed to the rest which took much longer to discover.
Damn. Today I'm watching videos of this channel every now and then just to find this 8 year old piece, which was created and uploaded when I was only 15. There was an internet before I found it and it gets more and more clear the deeper I go xD
***** i can type perfectly fine, but i honestly can't be bothered. triple-checking my comments just so some guy won't be able to reply with a snarky correction of my comment is not something i want to do
Even though this is probably identical to the official IAU definition here's my attempt (must fit criteria): - Is below the limiting mass limit for the nuclear fusion of deuterium (not a planetar/brown dwarf) - Has sufficient gravity originally to pull itself into a spherical shape (note that the wording includes Haumea) - Full-size planets must have cleared their surroundings of co-orbiting bodies, either by ejecting them via gravitational interactions or by pulling them inwards to be consumed or become natural satellites (dwarf planets like Pluto haven't done this)
My own third criterion would be: - Is the dominant object in the neighbourhood of its orbit. This way, moons are allowed in its orbit, as well as trojans. I notice that many people object to the IAU criterion. They say: ''Look, the Earth has not cleared the neighbourhood of others object in its orbit, because of the moon. So most planets do not pass this third criterion.''
William Tiley There is no official IAU definition of a binary planet. At the moment it would be hypothetical, because no binary planets are known. Well maybe Pluto and Charon, if you disregard the ''dwarf'' part of dwarf planet. Earth and moon? Mmmmm....... no, too much difference. But say, Earth and Venus? Orbiting around a common center, outside of either bodies? They would both be dominant objects. Who knows what strange exotic orbits moons would have? Circling only one of them, or both? I think it would qualify nicely - IF ''binary planet'' gets the same status as ''planet''. But... how about a binary of, say, Earth and Mars? If the IAU makes a careful decision here, they would also come with a definition for ''binary dwarf planet.'' So Pluto and Charon fit into it. Pluto and Earth are more dominant, Charon and Mars are less dominant. What do you think? There are no moons circling Charon. Nix, Stix, Hydra and Kerberos are circling the combined Pluto-Charon system together. Wait.... do the members of a binary planet have to be tidally locked or not? And so on...
I'd call Planets too small to fuse elements. Then categorize them into Brown Dwarfs, Rogue Planets, Planetoids, Asteroids, Comets, Satellites, Rocky Planets, Gas Giants (then subgroup of Gass Giant Hot and Cold) . With Satellite, if it obits something bigger than it that can't fuse, regardless of size relative to anything else BOOM Satellite. Planetoids are round to a degree of at least 75%, Asteroids less than 50%, Comets are just icy with tails of vapor, Brown Dwarfs can't fuse, Gas Giants have gases, Terrestrials have elements ONLY produced in Supernova explosions (Iron and up). Boom done. Gimme a Nobel Prize.
@@mikeyreza I think youtube has changed how it compresses videos... So it makes a small item sorrounded by a plain colour bigger than it actually is.. Probably for reading text in lower resolution
+JonJon4351 Ceres, Eris, and Pluto (though not Charon), along with a bunch of others, are considered dwarf planets. The IAU doesn't recognize double dwarf planet systems yet so they classify charon as a moon.
+dhodz hoddy Jupiter orbits around the sun where the suns gravity is the strongest which isn't outside the sun also the sun and the planets don't orbit one point, the planets orbit the sun.
So Jupiter is a dwarf planet as tons of asteroids are in their orbit so its orbit is not clear and the largest plant in the solar system and a planet with star-like features is now... A DWARF PLANET!!!!!
Amaad Ali "Clearing your orbit" means that there's no objects of similar size and mass or bigger in your orbit. Jupiter more than fulfills that requirement. Pluto fails hard. Really, the whole Pluto debate is just another example of the public prioritizing emotion over scientific fact. The world is round? Nah. The Earth goes around the Sun? Nah. Be proud, people refusing to accept that classifying Pluto as a planet is an outdated and non-useful classification: you're part of a long dynasty of science-deniers.
realizing this photo of Pluto was the most high quality in 2012
This was high quality as it got for so long. Imagine waiting for, I think it was 9 years, for the New Horizon project to reach Pluto. It was worth it though, we all wanted to know what it looked like, and what a beautiful planet it was.
@@Snorlax-zw9gc We got images from NASA who states they are of Pluto. Considering the equipment available when devices needed to send such a photo didn't exist for another ten years after the launch. nor is it possible for the existing radio antenna array to receive a signal from a device designed so long ago even possible. NASA being the only available source of data can state anything they wish, no one can prove them incorrect, well except for actual comparison of data available during the era it was sent on its voyage and the era is was supposedly received.
@@wmgthilgen :/
@@wmgthilgen here.. you dropped your tin hat.. you're welcome.
@@wmgthilgen 😐 i smell aluminum
What's crazy is when this video was made, an HD photo of Pluto didn't exist yet
A*
@@obi-wankenobi5926 An*. The abbreviation HD when spoken starts with a vowel, so it should be "an HD photo" just like you'd say "an hour".
PGraveDigger1 What if he pronounced “H” not like “aych,” but “haych?”
@@maxliu7576 Good point, that would change it verbally (although you could argue that the first "h" in "haych" is semi-silent). But within text, it wouldn't change, it would still be "an".
@@PGraveDigger1 tbh when the H is pronounced i find that ppl use 'an' moreso, not less. I've seen "an history". so, this argument is basically barking up a nothing tree.
I find it hilarious that Eris, named for the greek goddess of discord and chaos, was the one to upset Pluto’s status
Though old but "discord" the app?
@@samanthabishop6251 it was a joke since the other word also explains the meaning
This is just speculation, but maybe the people who discovered/named it foresaw pluto being demoted because of it, and thus named it as such.
@@Haliya. Sounds like a reasonable speculation. I don't think they had to foresee much, because Eris caused enough chaos in their own view on Pluto and it's surroundings.
Having read Heroes of Olympus and knowing quite a bit of Greek mythology now, I understood that XD
That shot of Jupiter taking up the entire sky triggered my flight or fight response.
For some reason I got like seriously scared
Its unnerving to me.
There is no escape.
"A Malfunctioning Destroyer"
@@amoralmarker6503 Bright, what did we tell you about posting classified information on the internet?
Its ok Pluto, Im not a planet either
The Ice Viper Im a planet
Saturn:WTF WE KNOW
The Ice Viper Your a hamplanet.
Dont worry Pluto. I have a dog named after me too
Did u just assume Pluto’s gender?
And now Uranus and Neptune aren't considered Gas Giants anymore but actually Ice Giants (as you probably know, this is a old video) but just interesting to see how our understanding is ever changing.
Indeed.
Unlike Jupiter and Saturn, which-just like stars-are comprised almost entirely of hydrogen and helium (but are actually much too small to *become* stars), Uranus and Neptune have a very different constitution.
Rather, they're both made up of ammonia, methane, and water. The last of which is kept under such high pressure by the other two that never evaporates despite reaching temperatures of more than 350°F.
Only an astrophysicist could ever get away with calling *boiling water* "ice."
Really!? Wow
Also Neptune sometimes goes into the Kuiper belt so hasnt cleared its neighbourhood (one of the IAU's three criteria for a planet), this isnt even talking about any of the asteroids orbiting at Jupiter's L4 and L5 points (they are called Trojan asteroids). Also Uranus and Neptune are considered Jovian planets (same with Jupiter and Neptune) which then go to 2 sub categories as you said
Weird, in Spain it was taught that there was two groups, the terrestrial planets and gas planets, the gas planets can be divided by gas giants and ice planets
@@melody._.3251 ....when and at what level?
"We need to first discuss a planet you've never heard of, Ceres" *laughs in outdated 3rd grade school supplies*
You learnd about Ceres in school? 😂
@@Vanuma25 I learned about Ceres by reading books
@@luggifer4360 Same
I remember drinking a brand of juice called Ceres. So that’s where it comes from.
I know Ceres
“We need to first discuss a planet you’ve never heard of before”
Me who’s watching the video a second time: “I am 4 parallel universes ahead of you”
Hehe
Hehe
i am 4 perpendicular universes ahead of you
Me who's played Universe Sandbox 2 and sees Ceres all the time: "I am 4 parallel universes ahead of you"
And he is 9 years ahead of you.
> Planet you've never heard of: Ceres
Meanwhile in my head: "CERES BELONGS TO THE BELTERS!"
BELTALOWDA
LONG LIVE THE OPA
Is that an Expanse reference?
@@captainskeleton3994 'tis indeed.
Ceres is the goddess of grain and Agriculture the equivalent of the Greek Goddess Demeter.
Basically what I'm hearing is we have to destroy Eris.
Pretty sure the Discordians wouldn't be OK with that. AT ALL.
But they would be willing to help with destroying Eris.
Because, y'know. Discordians.
+Cameron Ballard: That won't help you -- since Eris scientists have found several 'dwarf planets' in the Kuiper Belt that are larger than Pluto and they'll keep finding more for quite some time
To this day, there is no Kuiper Belt Object bigger than Pluto. Eris is the only object to have a higher mass and comparable size. Based on outdated estimations, Eris was supposedly bigger than Pluto, but New Horizons discovered that Pluto actually had a bigger diameter, if only by 50 km. the other three dwarf planets, which are also the biggest non-planetary objects in the solar system, are 963 km (Ceres), 1502 km (Makemake) and 1920x1540x990 km (Haumea, ellipsoid shape); compared to 2326 km (Eris) and 2374 km (Pluto).
The only object that could be bigger than Pluto would be a Planet Nine or a stray object that hasn't been found yet.
Cameron Ballard eris is actually smaller than pluto it was due to technological errors that it seemed that it was larger
Cameron Ballard NUU
Although Ceres got an upgrade and became a dwarf planet as its the only big and spherical object in the asteroid belt.
@John Boudreaux vesta is more potato shaped
And it’s much larger than everything immediately around it. I find it entertaining in astronomy books that have Ceres on one side, and the asteroids on the other.
But Ceres is special to me for being the only dwarf planet on this side of the Kepler belt :)
Ceres is under 1ooo km wide, not a planet, Pluto on the other hand, fits all the definition (criteria) of a planet.
@@rogerdiogo6893 no it doesn't
@@OrchidAlloy neither does planet earth, is shaped like a pear...
1:13 calling earth our home planet is one of the coolest things ever, even though it’s completely normal
Yeah
1:34
Grey: It’s smaller than nine moons!
Subtitle: It’s smaller than seven moons!
*nOIcE*
Ryujinzzz Yep and that’s just the person who made the subtitles fixing Grey’s mistake
thebigdog360 Which they shouldn't be doing. Subtitles should always capture what a person actually says, not what they should have said.
@@NoriMori1992 subtitle nazi
and the video showed 8.
@@NoriMori1992 It captures what he meant.
This video is so old that we didn’t have high def images of Pluto yet.
Nor Ceres
2020 we still dont have high def images of Pluto
ok maybe they are bigger resolution, but just go to google maps (they have planet-viewing mode). you cant really even see the craters (only the biggest ones)
@Gwyneth Yeo Bing Wen Student yea ik but they are not really high def tbh (unless you can find the GOOD ones cuz google only shows me the blobs or artwork [check if the picture is artist impression or sth cuz its very common])
wojtekpolska we do.
If Grey made this video today, there would be an HD version of the Pluto picture he posted in this video.
Before the arrival of the deep webb space probe, this blurry ball was actually the best image there was, a cgi render created with data from Hubble.
That probe was called New Horizons, not deep webb, don't know where you got that info.
@@toppatblue Probably the James Webb Deep Space Telescope which is being built.
A E S T H E T I C yeah, I guess. My point is still valid tho.
And of Ceres and Vesta
Pluto: *cries*
New horizons: _pluto is 4km larger than eris_
Pluto: YAY!
Eris is more massive than Pluto, but appears to be slightly smaller by volume. It's likely more rock and less ice than Pluto.
Yy we have same pfp
Nick World Mars rules Pluto drools
@@Human-gu2cx Earth rules Mars drools
I'm a pluton
It's so refreshing to be able to watch an informative video without someone talking about skillshare or world of warships
Welcome to 2012
insert brilliant refrence here
or christians in the comments on a space video
@@1un4cy As a christian i must say...
Youre right, why cant christians accept that some people think differently
AlphaAmoeba It’s not “think”different, it’s science.
Uh no Pluto is a dog
No no
@@MounibAjdk r/woooosh
What?
@@MounibAjdk ua-cam.com/video/r5eWCP29cDU/v-deo.html
The Disney dog named Pluto.
Fun fact about Pluto:
U could wrap Russia around Pluto and have leftover parts of Russia!
Surface area of Pluto ♇: 16647940km^2
Surface area of 🇷🇺: 17098322km^2
Eric scalies ._. no it’s not a planet it litteraly is in the way of Neptunes trajectory so its litteraly more of a moon than a planet.
And this is why we should all be scared of Russia
@@nikolazivkovic4880 I wanna see a collision! That'd be epic.
No the soviet union is bigger
@@Onixstar They'll likely never collide because Neptune and Pluto are in 2:3 resonant orbits, every 2 orbits of Pluto, Neptune does 3. Because of this, the two will never get close to each other.
It reminds me of that one Rick and Morty episode where Jerry refuses to accept that Pluto isn’t a plannet cause "you can’t just change science" when change is the whole point of science
To a point, the word “planet” is a human invention and open to interpretation, so this is literally astronomers changing science. A planet isn’t like a hydrogen atom: there is no disagreement as to what an atom is or its structure. The word “planet” suffers from the same issue as “continent”: no real formal definition.
Astronomers decided that a planet has to be round (its characteristics allow it to be as such), under the influence of a star, and “cleared the neighborhood” around its orbit. But this last condition was conveniently added to justify the recategorization and it’s not something that the cosmos has. Jupiter, for example, has trojan asteroids in its orbit (in front and back). Is that “cleared the neighborhood”? What about the near-Earth objects (like asteroids) that come close to Earth or even orbit Earth? What other Pluto-sized objects orbit close to Pluto that its orbit is not cleared?
So, yes...science changes when discoveries are made. For this, however, it was just astronomers making a list even more exclusive but nothing else has changed (Pluto still orbits the Sun, still preserves its characteristics, still has a circular orbit (compared to other KB objects), and is among the bigger objects beyond Neptune).
Wow that was a long explanation but yeah ☝️ agree
@@einsteinboricua
*>"Jupiter, for example, has trojan asteroids in its orbit (in front and back). Is that “cleared the neighborhood”? What about the near-Earth objects (like asteroids) that come close to Earth or even orbit Earth? What other Pluto-sized objects orbit close to Pluto that its orbit is not cleared?"
Before the
video played, I got a "hey Google" ad, in which a person asked Google if Pluto was a planet.
google ads are based on your search/watch history
UA-cam ads are based on tags on UA-cam videos put in by the uploader.
+Dhruv Verma i doubt it highly cause i constantly get non skippable amazon ads like 60% of the time no matter what the content also i have used amazon maybe twice in my entire life and bought sonething off it just once so i don't think i should get allthose amazon ads.
+360flyby something
Sensei Snowcones its because your intetest is probably pluto so google will show you that ad so cgp gets money 💵
Would it had been creepy if the New Horizons probe took a closeup picture of Pluto and it looked exactly like the pixelated low-resolution mush that the Hubble Telescope took?
It would be more aggravating than creepy.
knight wing I was imagining a Truman Show like scenario though, if all the distant objects in the sky are just low-resolution printouts fabricated by an observing alien race.
Vinesauce Obscurities Oh. I had no idea that that was what you meant.
knight wing It's all good.
Vinesauce Obscurities Ok.
"We spent all of this taxpayer money and scientific research on this, and all we got out of it was a blurry photo!"
I had a science test right as the debate over the upcoming switch came up. "How many planets orbit the sun?"
I wanted to strangle the test proctor. How am I supposed to know if its a planet when *scientists* are still discussing if it's a planet?!
Barley Sixseventwo What's worse is if you're gonna answer the correct answer that you know, or the follow the outdated curriculum which many (lazy) teachers just follow without research.
There isn't any debate any more. Pluto isn't a planet. We found things like pluto but bigger so include those or just accept that pluto isn't a planet.
They're not still discussing it though. It's a done and dusted subject. Pluto isn't a planet.
Samuel Kwok He meant when it was still being discussed
i have heard of ceres as well as eris
2:10 "... a planet you've never heard of; Ceres."
*Beltalowda have entered the chat*
?
@@Minny_curryEDITS The Belters, a faction of space-based asteroid dwellers from the sci-fi TV and book series The Expanse, have a large presence on Ceres. In their language (lang Belta) "Belter" is "Belta", and "people" is "lowda", so "people of the Belt" is Beltalowda. They have entered the chat because they are frustrated that one of their most significant bases is being cited as a place no one has heard of.
3:25
"This problem could be ignored as long as no one found an ice ball bigger than Pluto. Which is exactly what happened in 2006 with the Discovery of Eris."
Eris is larger by mass, but the New Horizons mission showed us that Pluto is in-fact bigger by volume. If sheer size was the predominant factor for demoting Pluto, that reason might not be enough anymore... because as of now Pluto is the largest object (at least by volume) beyond Neptune.
At the time Pluto was demoted, NH had just been launched so there was no way to prove this until the spacecraft reached the destination. At this point, it’s not mass, volume, or size what matters but rather whether Pluto “has cleared the neighborhood of its orbit”. The answer is no, which is why Pluto is a dwarf planet.
"A planet you've never heard of: Ceres"
Grey, I play Warframe, I know all about Ceres. That's where the Grineer make a lot of their ships.
And eris is where the infested live
Exactly.
@@edwardnygma8533 And where I farm everything because my weapons are seriously underleveled even tho I played normally and rushed nothing.
Eris is the infested homebase
oh so this is where i knew ceres from
Aren't Pluto, Ceres and Eris considered dwarf planets, which was a category created for them?
right!!!
Sort of. The category of dwarf planet is becoming more common, but it's still not universally accepted by astronomers.
Wolfeson28 Then why would they teach it to me at school if it's not accepted by astronomers?
Wolfeson28 Oh yeah, school system that's why.
good lesson in both history and science! Basically, nationalistic Americans (including some astronomers) pushed Pluto as a major planet in the public news media, and those many who questioned Pluto as a major planet in the decades following its discovery in 1930 didn't care enough to make a big deal of challenging it; there were other "more important" things to tackle, and besides, actual physical information on Pluto was simply lacking until its first satellite Charon was discovered in the late 1970s.... Some of the most-used university astronomy textbooks in the 1930s and 1940s actually posited Pluto more as a minor planet. Disney apparently had a lot to do with entrenching Pluto in the American consciousness. But it always was a silly school exercise to memorize "nine major planets" (or even eight!) ...
8 years later I'm still bummed that we don't call Eris the Queen of the Kuiper Belt and Ceres the Queen of the Asteroid Belt
Well, There can be a 9 planet, actually, the guy who discovered Ceres is actually the guy who discovered that can be a nine planet by the end of the Kuiper Belt, so, the 9 planet, with the size of Neptune should be the king or queen of the Kuiper Belt.
You could make a sci-fi setting with exactly these naming conventions.
Eris is smaller
@@AndyHappyGuy But classier
objec como: am i a joke to you
i learned more about the solar system in these 4 and a half minutes then i did in one entire science class (45 minutes) .-.
Eileen Liew That's the difference between the curiosity to learn and the education system.
Forrest Gump It's also the difference between rigorous education and entertainment education
Eileen Liew TRUE i think this is the perfect way to go , there are few entertaining teachers that become successful as famous good teachers in schools.
Why di mickey mouse go to space
Anwser He went to find Pluto!
Rubyclark08 Clark wow
This was incredibly well done, I am surprised I haven't seen this presented this way before. It certainly makes the asteroid belt more interesting knowing it previously had planets within it.
I just 'discovered' this channel 5 days ago, and it is now my absolute favourite.
1:41 for some reason this made me laugh really hard when i saw jupiter overwhelming the screen
Uhhh ok?
1:36 'Attempt no landings here' . . . Classic
i dotn get it can someone explain?
@@marluk8628 yeah so basically it means that you never want to like land on it with a vehicle
@@harrystone3527 No, because europa has underwater oceans, there's a chance that in the water there is life, so the joke is that aliens are saying "attempt no landings here"
@Carl Kirchhoff had just failed at my (quick) attempt to clarify this through google so thanks for explaining guys!
Grey seems to like 2010 with him referencing it in other videos
If I were Pluto, I would rather want to be a large asteroid, than a tiny planet.
Yep. Better to be a one eyed King in the land of blind than a cyclops in a land of two eyed, right?
Daniel Westerfield Plutoid*
I keep saying that Pluto went from the most pathetic of planets to the king of the Kuiper belt.
*Queen. Eris is King.
Pluto (god of the underworld) was male, hence King. Eris (goddess of strife) was female, hence Queen.
"A planet you've never heard of..."
Me oh lmao he's gunna say ceres...
*"Ceres"*
Grey, I think you Oort to do another planet video sometime soon!
Does anyone else get uncomfortable when they see Jupiter to scale?
It's terrifying
Luck at the sun to scale, hahaha
+MayuriKurotsuchi No. Why should we?
RonJohn63 I don't know. Maybe because it's just one of many visualizations of how small we are.
MayuriKurotsuchi Even when I was a theist, I knew how tiny the Earth was in the Solar System. It was presented to me in an "if the Earth were a tennis ball, then Jupiter would be a beach ball X number of miles away, and the Sun would be something much larger else N number of miles away.
It's when you realize that the Sun is one of *ten thousand million trillion stars*, and that the distance to the *nearest* of those stars is *25 trillion trillion miles* (41 trillion trillion km) -- much less the distance to the other end of the Milky Way, or even Andromeda our nearest neighbor Galaxy, which is *12 thousand trillion trillion miles away*) on top of how minuscule the Earth is in the Solar System that you realize how -- in the grand scheme of things -- utterly insignificant we are.
Ice ball bigger than Pluto... Russia xD
+Jacob Barron By surface area, that's actually true.
+Jacob Barron Russia isn't a ball though, it's more like a semi-circle with its 11 time zones
Ernie good enough
I haven't done the math, but you might be right. I know that our moon has roughly the same surface area as Australia, and Pluto is smaller than our moon, so it's definitely possible that a country on Earth might have a larger surface area than Pluto.
In Soviet Russia. Pluto bigger than Ice Ball
2:52 imagine if you have to take that test
I read it as “is pluto a ufo?” and that pretty much explains how late it is rn.
Watching this in the year 2018, after the New Horizons flyby of Pluto, it's insane how much better pictures we have of Pluto now. My mind is just completely blown by this.
I don't understand why people consider the label 'planet' as some sort of status symbol. The point of these labels is to classify groups of objects with similar characteristics together and allow for differentiation between other classifications. People act as if some insult was dealt to Pluto by its current classification.
anthropomorphization
+Francesco Magnoni The case may be that some people care more for a lifeless ball of ice 7.5 billion kilometres away than they do for many of the issues on our own planet with real people who feel and experience them...
Toby Martin it's easier to talk about insignificant and far away things rather than issues abuot which everybody has conflicting opinions and hard feelings.
if i just meet someone, i'd rather talk about weather than about cancer.
Francesco Magnoni That much is true. Obviously I have no qualm about people discussing planets! But when people get riled over the status of Pluto as if it's been personally offended...
+violacrb
You are not one of us.
This is not directly an insult but that doesn't mean it can't make you feel sad or excluded.
And for those of us that grew up with Pluto being one of planet buddies that is basicly what those mean scientist guys have been telling us about Pluto.
Not one of us not a planet.
That was incredibly helpful! Gosh why didn’t they just start with The Kuiper belt in school and use that as a starting point to then break the news that we were wrong about Pluto.
My school did in the mid 90's. We learned about the keiper belt (also pluto as a planet). But my teacher would refer to pluto as a "Neptunian Object" much more than a planet. And explained "there were many neptunian objects beyond neptune".
He was a head of his time as a teacher.
"Have you heard about Pluto? That's messed up, right?"
--Burton Guster
Bruton Gaster*
There should be no debate, there are certain requirements needed to be classified as a planet.
1. Must orbit the sun, Pluto does this
2. Must be formed into a sphere under it's own gravity, Pluto has done this
3. Must clear it's orbit of other bodies, this is where Pluto fails to meet the classification, there are thousands of other bodies nearly the size of Pluto or larger in it's orbit.
Isaac Ortiz Damn dude, what's up your ass?
But seeing as those "classifications" were made up after it was called a planet. It's like telling a midget they are a person and then saying later they aren't.
bromixsr But our definition was flawed from the beginning. Planet is far to broad a term to classify the objects in our solar system, if we did not change the definition there would be hundreds of thousands of planets in our solar system, a separate classification for dwarf planets is a good idea.
bromixsr The more we discover, the more differences we find. The more differences we find, the more we need to categorize. Your logic suggests that we should still call the world "flat".
GuiltyMiner0343
I can agree with acceptation to 3-
I would add an and/or "Is absorbing nearby masses into itself (smaller bodies)." Pluto still would not meet the requirement, but planets in the final stages of forming or with rings would pass.
Ooo don't forget the Oort Cloud, you gotta love the Oort Cloud
lol at the low-res image of Pluto.
Well done. I can understand Pluto defenders 'hearkening back to their youth' but the position of 9 planets seems untenable. We either have 8 or we have 15 or 20 (with more added every year).
This video, though informative, leaves out a crazy important detail :
The International Astronomical Union in 2006 defined a planet as a celestial body that :
a) Is in orbit around the Sun. b) Has sufficient body mass for its self gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium shape, i.e. nearly round in shape. c) Has cleared the neighborhood around its orbit.
Now, Pluto can't clear objects out of its path. Hence its called a dwarf planet.
Very true
+chorosso They are the ones which either do not have gravitational boundation with a star or have been thrown off from their orbit. I don't know the definition though.
+chorosso because theyre orbiting their sun.
and the exoplanets argument does not make any sense
***** That is bullshit. You obviously know what is going on but you refuse to call pluto a dwarf planet.
BRUH
***** WHAT WAS YOUR POINT THEN?
The three criteria for planetdom, are 1, it must be spherical, 2, it must have a regular orbit around the sun, and 3, it must have cleared its path of orbit. so because pluto is in the Kuiper belt, it has not cleared its orbit, and is therefore not a planet, and is instead a dwarf planet
Uuuuhhh the earth is a oblong and it isn't completely a sphere
I think that he meant to say that the object must have a greater mass than all the other objects within its orbital path. Since Pluto is small and within the Kuiper belt this isn't the case.
It's still spherical up to a point.
the problem with that rule is since pluto is located in the kuiper belt, it would need a giant ass gravity to clear it's neighborhood, so high, even Earth wouldn't be able to do it, so how is thay fair? On top of that Neptune also has multiple aestroids in its orbit so it should be considered a dwarf planet? This is when the rule is slightly messed up
Earth isn't located in the Kuiper belt though, it's in the "Earth belt". Earth shares this area of the solar system with a handful of asteroids and the Moon.
The difference between Earth & Neptune and bodies in the kuiper belt like Pluto is that both of those planets dominate their "belts". Pluto comes nowhere close to being the dominant force in the Kuiper belt.
So "Clearing its orbit" really means "Clearing its orbit of competing bodies". Hope that helps.
I think people forget that science is the process of becoming less and less wrong over time and not an ideology.
Sean Keuroghlian-Eaton finally someone gets it!
An alternate account huh?
it's not arbitrary tho? it's a way for humans to categorize things to make them more manageable and relevant to study, all of the things labeled in this video are solar bodies in our solar system, and we keep breaking them down to more and more specific taxonomies, solar bodies to plants or dwarf plants or moons etc, then they're described more specifically as terrestrial planets or gas giants or what have you, and then you describe them as their name, these definitions are useful for studying properties and determining properties of like objects we can't study as directly
We discovered new information and were faced with three choices. A) Introduce dozens of new planets. B) Leave it at 9 planets, but give up any meaning the word planet has. C) Demote Pluto.
We picked C.
No Science has never said anything that's been proven false. Babies DON'T feel pain. The Earth IS flat. It's obvious that the first thing Science says is always right
I'm so glad that we have way better pictures of Pluto now than when CGP Grey made this video. Yay New Horizons!
Pluto will always be a planet in my heart.
Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Ceres, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto, Eris, Quaoar, and Sedna
The 13 planets.
You should get that checked out. Having a planet inside of you must be painful
In your HEART? OMG the stupidity.......Will you please explain to me why being called a "planet" one day and then a "dwarf planet" the next is perceived by so many of you to be a "demotion" at all? Why is simply being called a planet "better" than being called a dwarf planet? A giant ball of rock and ice that's 8 LIGHT HOURS from the Sun DOES NOT give two shits what human beings call it.
The three criteria that defines a planet:
1. Spherical under own gravity - Check
2. Main body of orbit around star (excludes moons) - Check
3. Object dominates its orbit - Pluto fails
But this definition would result in Eris being called a planet!
Actually, it doesn't. It's only a few percent bigger than pluto, and neither of them are massive enough to "clear" their neighbourhood from other smaller objects (unlike Earth which contains over 99.99% of the mass of where it orbits). You misunderstood the second criteria (maybe cus I phrased it poorly). It is an official definition by IAU
Cruuzie Misunderstood the THIRD criteria**
It was the third one I misinterpreted, I incorrectly took "dominates orbit" to mean largest in its orbit - my bad!
Christopher Bradley Eris is a planet. Why is that a problem? It is now believed to be marginally smaller than Pluto though 27 percent more massive, which means more rocky and therefore more planet-like.
Though I'm the kind of person who subscribes to the notion of 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it', I agree with the reclassification of Pluto. With the discovery of Eris, Sedna and others, the list of planets would have ballooned out of control. Before 2006, no one had seriously considered what truly distinguishes a planet from other large-ish celestial bodies like Ceres in the asteroid belt. A line had to be drawn, and the International Astronomical Union did just that. We now have a stable list of bodies that covers all the 'main' ones in our solar system and excludes objects which are not large or 'special' enough.
A line did not have to be drawn. There is absolutely no scientific basis to artificially limiting the number of solar system planets to a low number. We already know the universe has billions of galaxies, many of which have billions of stars. Would we say Jupiter can't have 67 moons because kids can memorize only four? Memorization is not important to learning; what is important is understanding the different types of planets and their characteristics. If our solar system has 50-100 planets, then that is what it has. Why distinguish bodies like Ceres or Pluto from the larger planets when they share the same characteristics as those planets with the only difference being they are smaller versions of them? Also, we do not have a stable list of main planets because the IAU decision is contested by many astronomers, and there is no consensus in the field one way or the other.
It was politically convenient to preserve the memoriseable, small 'club' of planets. Personally, my concept -- and daresay many peoples' concept -- of the word 'planet' is a large body, one of a few rather than one of millions. You do, however, make some good points: convenience of memorising is not, in the grand scheme of things, important
plusplusplusplusp Thank you! I think we are going through a paradigm shift. The rapid discovery of exoplanets means it's only a matter of time before planets, like stars, number in the billions when we consider just our galaxy alone, never mind other galaxies! The reaction of the public and of many astronomers to what might have been a politically convenient position has not generally been positive. People like the idea of adding new planets and dislike taking planets away. As I'm sure you know, the term "large body" is very relative. Earth is hardly "large" compared to Jupiter, and the Sun is hardly large compared to some of the giant stars. Eventually, we will have to view the concept of planet based on subcategories such as terrestrial, jovian, dwarf, etc., with "large enough" meaning the object is large enough to be rounded by its own gravity.
I’ve never noticed this until now but I think it’s important to point out that you spelled “Kuiper” wrong at 3:38. Although I would love to see a Kupier belt as well :)
SSSSSHHHHT! If the international astronomical union gets wind of this they may decide they will rename the Kuiper belt as well. Do you think their havoc, madness, and pandemonium will stop at Pluto? Do not give them any ideas!
They will not rest until all is chaos, confusion, and commotion.
Oh let him go back in time and change the spelling for a random dude on the internet
@@gamerwpic9612 WHOOOSH
-🤓
@@butsgalore why you so angry mate!
Thank you for talking about me!
I think it's cool that in Sailor Moon, they have Sailor Soldiers for all the planets, and the moon, Pluto, Ceres, Vesta, Pallas and Juno. It's a big party.
Ok.
And the only way to save the planet is by making high school girls Superheroes. The reason they give is just made up a little bit into the series. And it's just an excuse to let the animators draw naked high school girls.
Crazy how a 9 year old CGP grey video still looks and sounds better than most videos people make today.
Interestingly, Eris was latter in 2010 calculated to be slightly smaller than Pluto by volume.
1:34 I see that space odyssey reference
4:20 Another way to classify it is:
- Jupiter, Saturn, King George, Neptune
- Some rocks
1:45 Imagine that great red spot as an eye looking at you.
1:22 9 years have passed and now my non fullscreen cellphone can show pluto, how crazy is that
Well, I think that discovering that it was just a part of the Kuiper belt and not a lone body that scientists just arbitrarily wanted to re-classify makes more sense. I had wondered why, since I had always been told that Pluto affected planetary movement, that the classification of 'planet' was dependent on size. Thanks for the explanation, it's the only one that I've seen so far that has broken it down so easily.
It's been 8 years
I love Pluto, it is my favorite planet.
Pallas, Ceres, Pluto, Eris, the other names he mentioned, and several more, aren't asteroids or anything like that. They've been re-named dwarf-planets, which in my opinion is still a planet I will continue to acknowledge them as such.
Carter Kane Good luck reciting all their names.
@@WilliamStrealy1 Irrelevant.
3:38 Not "Kupier" but "Kuiper" Belt.
Bruh this video is seven years old
@@16.jonathanoneal69 so. No one manage to catch that cuz people didnt know much of anything of these things. He had one job
Thank you, that was bugging me.
That, and the small bit with Galileo was inaccurate, but the video's not really about history. Some things we have to let slide sometimes, though you're not wrong for pointing them out.
He actually pronounced it perfectly, but spelled it incorrectly
ua-cam.com/video/Bwwkz6xFtmQ/v-deo.html
1:42 and following made me laugh quite a lot :D the drawings are fantastic
well, even if the planets won't accept pluto, i'm glad he found his home with the kupier belt 🤧🌸💕
If Rick and Morty taught me anything, its that Pluto is all political.
Pluto is a cold, cold Celestial Dwarf.
You mean planet, a cold cold planet
Yomu nope
its a *blurp* dwarf
"let's discuss a planet you've never heard of. Ceres"
Not if you play Warframe 😁
Or watch the Expanse
Get Clem!
Greetings Operator, Ordis is happ-ANGRY!
My uncle just installed that lol
My computer's hostname is "ceres"...
I feel bad for Pluto. Kicked out from being an Olympian , kicked out from being a planet
Great video as always. But I would like to have heard something about the different suggested definitions of planet, like "has cleared its orbit of any debris"
The ancient Greeks weren't trying to classify natural kinds by introducing the word, "planet", i.e., "planetes". All it meant, literally, was "wanderer" or "wandering thing". It was a wanderer, a planet, if it didn't (appear to) move in unison with the "fixed" stars. That's it. Calling a number of things "planets" was not at the same time assuming they were all similar in some important way, except in that they appeared to have paths of motion discordant with the appearance of the unified motion of the stars. When it came to actually theorizing the nature of the wanderers, they regarded the sun as very different in nature than the moon, and some regarded the proper planets they could see as very different in nature than the sun and the moon.
Their use of the term "planetes" is still accurate, in a sense. All of the sun, moon, proper planets, and asteroids, still (appear to) move in paths different than that of the "fixed" stars. Can't blame the ancient Greeks for introducing a bad concept.
The problem, if there is one, goes back to Copernicus and Galileo. Once they recognized that the earth and the wandering planets orbit the sun, and, with Galileo, started believing that the earth, moon, and wandering planets were all made out of the same stuff, then, boom, the word "planet" becomes a kind term. I'd guess, it's a fairly educated guess, that right around that time, the concept associated with "planet", in whatever language, is roughly just any large, spherical conglomeration of corpuscles, or little bits of matter, orbiting the sun. It's right about there, I'd figure, that our modern concept of a planet emerges, with whatever problems it may have.
Then, again, I think all the hoopla surrounding reclassifying Pluto was tedious anyway. A couple of scientists with psychological problems getting a kick out of telling people they're dumb to think Pluto is really a planet, even though they've been told that all their lives. I say we go back to the ancient Greek concept. We call anything not a star, in the region of our solar system, a planet, and then let scientists introduce cool new terms to categorize planets as befits their research interests. Just my two cents.
*****
Perhaps you missed the point of my remarks. That may be my fault. That was an awfully long comment. At the end I said we should let scientists introduce new terminology that more precisely reflects their (scientific) interests. Redefining "planet", a term that has such ubiquitous use in ordinary discourse, is lame. Why play around with a word with such a long history of a wide variety of uses? Give it up. Let it go. Define it loosely for ordinary use, and let scientists offer new terminology that more accurately reflects the present state of our knowledge.
ClockCutter So, those scientists have psychological problems for redefining planet to mean something different from what people have been taught. Your solution then is to adopt a definition of planet that's different from what people have been taught?
Gotcha.
Who decided to label floating rocks in space anyway
+Xianaic it was just the Greeks seeing "wish those dots wander", referring to the fact that the stars move together but the planets move completely differently from our sights, wander becomes plane and wanderer becomes planet.
It's really our fault for never translating the names to keep them ambiguous.
Respect Pluto's dwarf pronouns, capitalist pigs.
+Po Yao “Kiro” Cheong EVERY civilization and culture has labeled them for the same reason that they label EVERYTHING on Earth: it's what we do.
Kiro Notkiro
So when the time comes for conversations, we don't have to say "That floating rock in space" to identify it.
this video made me feel less sad about Pluto’s fate, thanks!
Same
Same
Lol, this video came out before New horizons.
So Pluto is just a blurry orange spot.
1:13 StarCraft refrence.... I love you
That term has been used in so many things, most of which are older than StarCraft. Terra is Latin for Earth.
zeke1220 well... ok.
:P Fail
0:33 creeper
ani_veanohi "Terra," and, "Terran," are used in a lot of Sci-Fi works as an alternative to Earth, because that's just another name for it, but, for what it's worth, "Terran," will always mean those little, blue bastards to me, too :D
I first read it as “Is Planet a Pluto?”
😂
Does Pluto is Planet?
"You hear what happened to Pluto? Messed up right?" - Gus
he he, uranus is a gas giant.
Uranus is an ice giant
It is both.
Uranus is sorrounded by Methane.
"Did you hear about Pluto, that's messed up" - Gus
I always wondered (Once I got out of gradeschool and learned how things really were) what set Pluto apart from all the other things there, that it stood out when first discovered as opposed to the rest which took much longer to discover.
Damn. Today I'm watching videos of this channel every now and then just to find this 8 year old piece, which was created and uploaded when I was only 15. There was an internet before I found it and it gets more and more clear the deeper I go xD
well you convinced me..
3:37 Spelt Kuiper wrong?
***** Learned or learnt? Ever heard of non-American English? prntscr.com/96kcp4
+Xianaic Uploads minecraft videos and tries to correct grammatical errors where there are none, you're the worst kind of person.
+krinord the fact that he makes minecraft videos has absolutely nothing to do with this, it is completely irrelevant
***** i can type perfectly fine, but i honestly can't be bothered. triple-checking my comments just so some guy won't be able to reply with a snarky correction of my comment is not something i want to do
+TheJman0205 "You also need to end sentences with a period" - Who are you to tell us what to do?
Seriously, stop being a grammer nazi
I've known about Ceres since I was a kid, and it's always been my favourite stellar object orbiting our star ^_^
I don't think there are any special qualities in Ceres why would you rank it above Saturn 😑
They did Hades (Greek way of saying Pluto) dirty. Making the “planet”named after him a dwarf planet.
Even though this is probably identical to the official IAU definition here's my attempt (must fit criteria):
- Is below the limiting mass limit for the nuclear fusion of deuterium (not a planetar/brown dwarf)
- Has sufficient gravity originally to pull itself into a spherical shape (note that the wording includes Haumea)
- Full-size planets must have cleared their surroundings of co-orbiting bodies, either by ejecting them via gravitational interactions or by pulling them inwards to be consumed or become natural satellites (dwarf planets like Pluto haven't done this)
My own third criterion would be: - Is the dominant object in the neighbourhood of its orbit. This way, moons are allowed in its orbit, as well as trojans. I notice that many people object to the IAU criterion. They say: ''Look, the Earth has not cleared the neighbourhood of others object in its orbit, because of the moon. So most planets do not pass this third criterion.''
Marc Dezaire How would a binary of two Earth-size planets fit into that criterion, then?
William Tiley There is no official IAU definition of a binary planet. At the moment it would be hypothetical, because no binary planets are known. Well maybe Pluto and Charon, if you disregard the ''dwarf'' part of dwarf planet. Earth and moon? Mmmmm....... no, too much difference. But say, Earth and Venus? Orbiting around a common center, outside of either bodies? They would both be dominant objects. Who knows what strange exotic orbits moons would have? Circling only one of them, or both? I think it would qualify nicely - IF ''binary planet'' gets the same status as ''planet''. But... how about a binary of, say, Earth and Mars? If the IAU makes a careful decision here, they would also come with a definition for ''binary dwarf planet.'' So Pluto and Charon fit into it. Pluto and Earth are more dominant, Charon and Mars are less dominant. What do you think? There are no moons circling Charon. Nix, Stix, Hydra and Kerberos are circling the combined Pluto-Charon system together. Wait.... do the members of a binary planet have to be tidally locked or not? And so on...
Marc Dezaire Yep. Complicated.
I'd call Planets too small to fuse elements. Then categorize them into Brown Dwarfs, Rogue Planets, Planetoids, Asteroids, Comets, Satellites, Rocky Planets, Gas Giants (then subgroup of Gass Giant Hot and Cold) . With Satellite, if it obits something bigger than it that can't fuse, regardless of size relative to anything else BOOM Satellite. Planetoids are round to a degree of at least 75%, Asteroids less than 50%, Comets are just icy with tails of vapor, Brown Dwarfs can't fuse, Gas Giants have gases, Terrestrials have elements ONLY produced in Supernova explosions (Iron and up). Boom done. Gimme a Nobel Prize.
I could see Pluto without full screen hd mode
I could see in 144p
@@mikeyreza I think youtube has changed how it compresses videos... So it makes a small item sorrounded by a plain colour bigger than it actually is.. Probably for reading text in lower resolution
896x504
My teacher gave us this video in class for the topic on Pluto being a planet or not.
I’m just glad more and more objects are being discovered and explored.
If it has a heart on it, it's a planet.
Then i'm a planet
vesteel
You have a heart in you, not on you.
archlorddestin Can you please elaborate your comment? A heart ON it?
vesteel
Look at a picture of pluto. It has a huge heart on it.
archlorddestin literally? (lol)
At least pluto found his home
I have always been taught that Ceres and Eris were part of the dwarf planets, along with Pluto and its Twin Charon that orbit each other.
+dhodz hoddy what I should clarify is that pluto and Charon are orbiting each other whilst orbiting the sun + not My logic, just what I was taught.
+JonJon4351 Ceres, Eris, and Pluto (though not Charon), along with a bunch of others, are considered dwarf planets. The IAU doesn't recognize double dwarf planet systems yet so they classify charon as a moon.
Yes. Double planet systems are strange and interesting, aren't they?
+dhodz hoddy Jupiter orbits around the sun where the suns gravity is the strongest which isn't outside the sun also the sun and the planets don't orbit one point, the planets orbit the sun.
+JonJon4351 Charon is a moon. an object doesn't have to orbit around a planet to be a moon.
Poor poor old pluto.
After forcly kicked to the underworld in silly godly gamble, now pluto is kicked from other godly named planets :D
Pluto. Is. A. Planet. >:(
"A planet you've never heard of, Ceres" _Opens space book I was given when I was 7_ *A LIE*
Oh my god these comments are giving me cancer. Pluto isn't a planet. Just fucking let it go, people.
It's a round body with a stable orbit around a star. Ergo, a planet.
It hasn't cleared its orbit, ergo, NOT a planet. It isn't even the largest body in the Kuiper Belt.
So Jupiter is a dwarf planet as tons of asteroids are in their orbit so its orbit is not clear and the largest plant in the solar system and a planet with star-like features is now...
A DWARF PLANET!!!!!
Amaad Ali Are you fucking serious.
Amaad Ali "Clearing your orbit" means that there's no objects of similar size and mass or bigger in your orbit. Jupiter more than fulfills that requirement. Pluto fails hard.
Really, the whole Pluto debate is just another example of the public prioritizing emotion over scientific fact. The world is round? Nah. The Earth goes around the Sun? Nah. Be proud, people refusing to accept that classifying Pluto as a planet is an outdated and non-useful classification: you're part of a long dynasty of science-deniers.
"Here it goes again... Just shrank a little..."