Hey guys! If you liked the video, we would love for you to share it on social networks like Facebook, Reddit, Instagram, Tik Tok and Twitter.(Since the algorithm is not helping us in terms of views😅). You will greatly help the Insane Curiosity community to grow and improve more and more our upcoming content. A big thank you from all of us!
Pluto and Charon are DBL planet system and all other icy round bodies are planets too get over it I don't ever want to hear the word dwarf planet again
The funny thing about us classifying it over and over again is that the universe itself doesn't care about what makes a planet different from a dwarf planet or even a moon. I mean, the Earth's moon is larger than Pluto. It really doesn't matter.
It matters in terms of precise scientific understanding and education. For example, calling something a planet if it's really a comet can lead to both scientific confusion as well as inaccurate understanding among the public.
Hmmm very interesting! I'm just glad that pluto is no longer that ugly gray planet as we learned in kinder garden and we now have a beautiful image of this planet!
Glad SOMEBODY is thinking straight. Most astronomers don’t even study planets, so why do they care? That’s like planetologists making a new definition of a galaxy. Pluto was always a planet. The people who say it isn’t are in the minority, yet THAT’S the opinion that got spread like the gospel truth. Why is this even accepted? What if planetologists voted to say the Sagittarius Dwarf galaxy is no longer a galaxy? Would that get adopted in textbooks overnight and deemed as scientific fact? It’s honestly disgusting how the scientific method was completely disregarded in favor of an unscientific vote that (almost) everyone just immediately went along with. Pluto is a planet because votes don’t determine scientific facts. Just based on precedent.
I think the declassification of Pluto as a planet is a load of baloney. Even if you call it a dwarf planet, it is still a planet. A dwarf person is still a person and a dwarf star is still a star. Let's take this definition of a dwarf planet being that it's a spherical Object that orbits the sun but has not cleared it's orbit. The first two points are no different from any other planet. However, if a human dwarf is surrounded by other people, it doesn't make that person any less human. If a dwarf star is surrounded by other stars, it doesn't make that star any less a star. Therefore, if a dwarf planet is surrounded by other objects, it doesn't make that planet any less a planet. It may be small and thus calling it a dwarf is appropriate, but that doesn't mean it is not a planet as well.
That’s right. Most everybody is fine with “dwarf planet” as a category as long as dwarf planets ARE planets. And it should be based on size (like dwarf star and dwarf galaxy), not based on what’s nearby in its orbit. Planetologists still call Pluto a planet. There’s no reason not to. The IAU vote was an embarrassment to science and should be ignored.
Criterion 1 is bad because it doesn’t include any other planet in the universe and criteria 2 and 3 are redundant. Here’s a good definition: 1. In hydrostatic equilibrium. 2. Not doing nuclear fusion.
Pluto was named after using the initials P.L. for Percival Lowell, who spotted it. As PL is also the initials of the element Plutonium, the name Pluto was born. It is no question that Disney then used this name for its latest cartoon character "Pluto". After all......................................... NOBODY uses the Elemental Tables to name their pets!😃
I like the theory that the 5th gas Giant is actually mercury ... Some model show us mercury like a hot Jupiter of size of Neptune. Now strip of the gases thanks to the proximity with the sun. Good video btw
We discovered a lot of huge hot gas giants that much closer to íts host star than Mercury, so I doubt Mercury was the core of any gas giant. And if it was, it still must be bigger than Earth , not that small
I want to mention, but on Sun scale. Planets and dwarf planets rotate around Sun, yes? Yes. Well there is some dwarf planets (and maybe some planets too? Haven't checked) orbit is elongated that their orbital centre where they rotate is outside of Sun. Would it make them stop counting as Sun's planets /dwarf planets because of that? No. And now on smaller scale like dwarf's moons would be in similar dilemma
The IAU hasn't updated the dwarf planet list since 2008 despite many bodies meeting the criteria. Sedna is the largest of these and it is 100.00% a dwarf planet but people are just going to pull up the official list which does not have it. Lots of future dwarf planets which were discovered 15-20 years ago don't even have names yet.
@@Jellyman1129I think the definition should be like this: 1: It must revolve around the Sun or another star. 2: It must be spherical. It should be 2000 km in diameter. Beyond these definitions, we have 10 planets. Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto and Eris.
@@Керми-19 A planet is any celestial body large enough to assume hydrostatic equilibrium and not large enough to ignite in nuclear fusion. This includes planets around our Sun, planets around other stars, large moons, and rogue planets. Our solar system has dozens of planets.
Very excited to see this! I’m happy to see scientists get a more refined understanding of what’s beyond our atmosphere. Bring on the better classification and looking forward to see what other astronomical bodies will have it!
Planet, binary or double-planet...my head hurts...oof! All I know is we are not the only ones who consider Pluto a planet. This is gonna sound crazy but...I was once catnapped by aliens who took me to their home system. Once our business was concluded, they wanted to take me home but couldn't remember if we were supposed to go left or right. I told them to look for a system with nine planets and boom, they were able to get me home in a jiff.
Planets require a matrix. There are dozens of relevant discriptors that might apply to each. Using different discriptors gives a clearer or more accurate means of differentiating each body. Size, mass, rings, primary body, secondary etc.
I don't really understand why people want Pluto to be a planet. It's not like the change in classification made Pluto stop existing. It should just bring attention to the various other similar objects in our solar system. Ceres was originally thought to be a planet in the 1800s and got reclassified and no one is up in arms over that.
@@thomastyler8379Part of the reason is people want the integrity of the scientific method. They want scientific discovery to slowly change our perception of reality naturally through the data. They do NOT want something to change literally overnight because a handful of people voted on it. That’s arbitrary and unscientific.
The problem with the definition of a planet as it stands is that final definition of "clearing the neighbourhood" is somewhat ambiguous. Technically, is Neptune a planet? Pluto and Charon both cross inside its orbit. Is Jupiter a planet? It hasn't cleared its moons or its Trojan asteroids. Does this mean that the definition of a planet is more about a function of distance from the Sun, time and the random nature of metior disturbances via other planets, than any intrinsic characteristic of the planet itself. Was Earth a planet before Saturn? And how dense should space be before a planet is considered to have "swept its field"? Certainly even Jupiter has some random meters in its field.
Ceres went through all this classification stuff long ago. Since Ceres was ultimately, finally considered a dwarf planet back then, the concept of "dwarf planet" cannot be new. Can it?
@@troyheck4366He doesn’t agree with it because he coined “dwarf planet” to mean “small planet”, analogous to “dwarf star” and “dwarf galaxy”. The IAU completely botched it and used the term to define something entirely different, making fools of themselves.
Some say this planet exist...and have advanced life on it .. Maybe as some say those Annunaki came from that planet who has a very long distance rotation from the solar system... Some say about 3000 years...or maybe more... And some say this planet soon will be visible...
That’s not a requirement to be a planet. There are binary stars and binary asteroids with barycenters between both objects, and now we know binary planets exist too. Where the barycenter is located doesn’t matter.
@@Jellyman1129 I know it is not a requirement - I suggest it as a further identifying characteristic, solving the question of whether Pluto is or is not a planet. nowt to do with stars or asteroids
@@alasdairwhyte6616 It’s useful as a descriptor. Pluto and Charon are a binary planet because the barycenter lies between them. But it’s not useful to *define* a planet by its barycenter location because it gives inconsistent results.
Pluto was named after the ruler of the Greek underworld from their mythology, as well as the rest of the planets, and not after an cartoon dog... BTW Plutos moon - Charon was named after the ferryman of the underworld.
Ahhh, do some astronomers need more attention, are we going to change our sun to no longer a sun but a fluffy bag of gas so we can get some attention. Do you need more acknowledgement?
I guess the Sun isn’t a star anymore, it’s a dwarf star. And it must be scientific fact because a handful of inexperienced astronomers voted on it. Seriously, the IAU should be embarrassed. They’re the laughing stock of the astronomical community.
Doesn't the SUN have Gravitational pull? If so wouldn't some debris of planet forming have been drawn with gravity into the Sun ?😮I hear about the gravity of distant Stars coming into play and gravity of Planets also effecting bodies , in or out of orbit, seems that a body of most sizes that is not in orbit should head towards a Planet or the CLOSEST STAR THE SUN ❤
I was really unhappy when it was reclassified. But you know, it really does make sense. There are so many plutoids out there with really eccentric orbits. I mean, should we define Vesta as a planet (in the asteroid belt)?
@@mjblcmichael Vesta is a borderline case, as is Pallas. I disagree about the IAU definition making sense. Its major problem is that it classifies objects first and foremost by where they are rather than by what they are. Location should not be given primacy over an object's intrinsic properties. Pluto has complex geology much like the terrestrial planets. That type of geology starts happening when an object is large enough to be rounded by its own gravity. Eccentric orbits alone do not disaqualify an object from being a planet. There are giant exoplanets that have orbits around their stars that are much more eccentric than Pluto's is around the Sun. If those objects aren't planets, what are they?
The reason they made Pluto a dwarf planet is because after Eris they thought they'd find many Pluto sized objects in the Kuiper Belt so they preemptively demoted Pluto. That never happened thus Plutos demotion and the abomination of a definition that justified it were completley pointless.
Hey guys! If you liked the video, we would love for you to share it on social networks like Facebook, Reddit, Instagram, Tik Tok and Twitter.(Since the algorithm is not helping us in terms of views😅). You will greatly help the Insane Curiosity community to grow and improve more and more our upcoming content. A big thank you from all of us!
Dude, please, there is no Sharon at Pluto, there is Charon (English ortography would write it "Kharon" or "Haron").
@@Northerner-NotADoctorit’s pronounced many ways and Sharon is one of them. Just chill out.
Not going to happen 🙊
Proud to say -- I once met Clyde Tombaugh! (discoverer of Pluto) He gave a talk at our local science museum.
That sounds so cool! It must have been an honor to meet him! 💫
I grew up with Pluto as a planet. It’s a planet. Leave Pluto alone!
Planet experts still call it a planet.
Pluto and Charon are DBL planet system and all other icy round bodies are planets too get over it I don't ever want to hear the word dwarf planet again
Pluto is a planet! Pluto is a planet!
Most planetary scientists agre with you!
Pluto is definitely a planet. The process to demote it was irregular and invalid.
Pluto is a Dog! Goofy is a Skinny Hippo !
The funny thing about us classifying it over and over again is that the universe itself doesn't care about what makes a planet different from a dwarf planet or even a moon. I mean, the Earth's moon is larger than Pluto. It really doesn't matter.
Well, kinda. A moon orbits a larger body. So that is classified pretty well.
It matters in terms of precise scientific understanding and education. For example, calling something a planet if it's really a comet can lead to both scientific confusion as well as inaccurate understanding among the public.
@@theontologistI agree. Taxonomy is important and classifying objects is something that must be done right.
Pluto will always be a planet to me! 🙌
Of course it’s still a planet! Planetologists say so!
Remember Pluto got classified in October 17, 2023? Because of the planes flying in towers!
Hmmm very interesting! I'm just glad that pluto is no longer that ugly gray planet as we learned in kinder garden and we now have a beautiful image of this planet!
And almost as beautiful an image of Charon.
With a "Heart" even!
Why astronomers even speak about Pluto?
It is a matter for planetologists, and planetologists never took away Pluto's status.
Glad SOMEBODY is thinking straight. Most astronomers don’t even study planets, so why do they care? That’s like planetologists making a new definition of a galaxy.
Pluto was always a planet. The people who say it isn’t are in the minority, yet THAT’S the opinion that got spread like the gospel truth. Why is this even accepted? What if planetologists voted to say the Sagittarius Dwarf galaxy is no longer a galaxy? Would that get adopted in textbooks overnight and deemed as scientific fact? It’s honestly disgusting how the scientific method was completely disregarded in favor of an unscientific vote that (almost) everyone just immediately went along with.
Pluto is a planet because votes don’t determine scientific facts. Just based on precedent.
I think the declassification of Pluto as a planet is a load of baloney. Even if you call it a dwarf planet, it is still a planet. A dwarf person is still a person and a dwarf star is still a star. Let's take this definition of a dwarf planet being that it's a spherical Object that orbits the sun but has not cleared it's orbit. The first two points are no different from any other planet. However, if a human dwarf is surrounded by other people, it doesn't make that person any less human. If a dwarf star is surrounded by other stars, it doesn't make that star any less a star. Therefore, if a dwarf planet is surrounded by other objects, it doesn't make that planet any less a planet. It may be small and thus calling it a dwarf is appropriate, but that doesn't mean it is not a planet as well.
That’s right. Most everybody is fine with “dwarf planet” as a category as long as dwarf planets ARE planets. And it should be based on size (like dwarf star and dwarf galaxy), not based on what’s nearby in its orbit.
Planetologists still call Pluto a planet. There’s no reason not to. The IAU vote was an embarrassment to science and should be ignored.
Lowell is pronounced low(opposite of high)-ell
Sounds more like Bowl and not like Powell. Lake Powell is two hours north of Lowell observatory.
Pluto should be called a Planet
Pluto is a planet! Pluto is a planet!
My personal definition of a planet:
1. Orbits the Sun
2. Hydrostatic Equilibrium
3. A Diameter equal to or greater than 1000 km
I'd raise the bar to 2300 km.
And is round
@@Wolfje9346 Thats what number 2 on his post means.
@@commodorezero 👍
Criterion 1 is bad because it doesn’t include any other planet in the universe and criteria 2 and 3 are redundant.
Here’s a good definition:
1. In hydrostatic equilibrium.
2. Not doing nuclear fusion.
Pluto was named after using the initials P.L. for Percival Lowell, who spotted it. As PL is also the initials of the element Plutonium, the name Pluto was born. It is no question that Disney then used this name for its latest cartoon character "Pluto".
After all.........................................
NOBODY uses the Elemental Tables to name their pets!😃
I like the theory that the 5th gas Giant is actually mercury ... Some model show us mercury like a hot Jupiter of size of Neptune. Now strip of the gases thanks to the proximity with the sun.
Good video btw
I argue that mercury is also a dwarf planet because the sun cleared mercurys path
We discovered a lot of huge hot gas giants that much closer to íts host star than Mercury, so I doubt Mercury was the core of any gas giant. And if it was, it still must be bigger than Earth , not that small
@@chrissr318And Mercury has an eccentric and inclined orbit. Sounds like an IAU dwarf planet to me.
#MakePlutoGreatAgain
I want to mention, but on Sun scale. Planets and dwarf planets rotate around Sun, yes? Yes. Well there is some dwarf planets (and maybe some planets too? Haven't checked) orbit is elongated that their orbital centre where they rotate is outside of Sun. Would it make them stop counting as Sun's planets /dwarf planets because of that? No. And now on smaller scale like dwarf's moons would be in similar dilemma
The Sun and Jupiter orbit each other about a point that is outside the surface of the Sun.
Love your videos. I often listen to them while working and your content gets me through my day.
glad you like them!
Doesn't Sedna count as a dwarf planet?
The IAU hasn't updated the dwarf planet list since 2008 despite many bodies meeting the criteria. Sedna is the largest of these and it is 100.00% a dwarf planet but people are just going to pull up the official list which does not have it. Lots of future dwarf planets which were discovered 15-20 years ago don't even have names yet.
Yes, it absolutely does. The IAU has been lazy when it comes to adding more dwarf planets, so I’d just ignore them.
I heard Tombaughs daughter Annette was a fan of the cartoon character.
But under the rules for a dwarf planet, even jupiter becomes a dwarf planet
That’s true, and that’s why the definition doesn’t work.
@@Jellyman1129I think the definition should be like this: 1: It must revolve around the Sun or another star. 2: It must be spherical. It should be 2000 km in diameter. Beyond these definitions, we have 10 planets. Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto and Eris.
@@Керми-19 A planet is any celestial body large enough to assume hydrostatic equilibrium and not large enough to ignite in nuclear fusion. This includes planets around our Sun, planets around other stars, large moons, and rogue planets. Our solar system has dozens of planets.
At least one planet, "Lost" is now an Astroid Belt.
3:22 still waiting for Mercury to be reclassified as a dwarf planet as it meets the definition.
99% of people on this planet say Pluto is planet number 9. The museum cleaner can keep on cleaning......
Of course it’s a planet. Only conceited senior citizens within the Irrelevant Astronomical Union say otherwise.
Very excited to see this! I’m happy to see scientists get a more refined understanding of what’s beyond our atmosphere. Bring on the better classification and looking forward to see what other astronomical bodies will have it!
We need a logical, consistent definition of a planet and the geophysical planet definition is just that!
PLUTO is the best PLANET EVER
It has a heart!
Pluto is a planet. Charon is Pluto's moon. Period!
Charon is more like Pluto’s binary companion, but they’re both planets.
Planet, binary or double-planet...my head hurts...oof! All I know is we are not the only ones who consider Pluto a planet. This is gonna sound crazy but...I was once catnapped by aliens who took me to their home system. Once our business was concluded, they wanted to take me home but couldn't remember if we were supposed to go left or right. I told them to look for a system with nine planets and boom, they were able to get me home in a jiff.
Jerry Smith likes this
@5.55 ‘if one of the two objects is by far the heaviest [sic].’ That should be ‘heavier’.
Rogue planets.... we just don't have the tech right now to explore them, so sad
Wouldnt it be nice if the universe just put objective labels on everything so that we don’t have to argue about space rock
Great video and information !
Thank you.
One-eighty-wonth??? 😅
For future reference and because English is dumb--1/81th would be correctly written 1/81st. There is no "oneth", but there is a "first".
Planets require a matrix. There are dozens of relevant discriptors that might apply to each. Using different discriptors gives a clearer or more accurate means of differentiating each body. Size, mass, rings, primary body, secondary etc.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
I wish Pluto would become again. No real scientific reason for it, but it would just feel "right", if you know what I mean.
I don't really understand why people want Pluto to be a planet. It's not like the change in classification made Pluto stop existing. It should just bring attention to the various other similar objects in our solar system. Ceres was originally thought to be a planet in the 1800s and got reclassified and no one is up in arms over that.
@@thomastyler8379Part of the reason is people want the integrity of the scientific method. They want scientific discovery to slowly change our perception of reality naturally through the data. They do NOT want something to change literally overnight because a handful of people voted on it. That’s arbitrary and unscientific.
Good video!
The problem with the definition of a planet as it stands is that final definition of "clearing the neighbourhood" is somewhat ambiguous. Technically, is Neptune a planet? Pluto and Charon both cross inside its orbit. Is Jupiter a planet? It hasn't cleared its moons or its Trojan asteroids. Does this mean that the definition of a planet is more about a function of distance from the Sun, time and the random nature of metior disturbances via other planets, than any intrinsic characteristic of the planet itself. Was Earth a planet before Saturn? And how dense should space be before a planet is considered to have "swept its field"? Certainly even Jupiter has some random meters in its field.
The sun and Jupiter’s Barry center are outside of the sun. How does that work?
No way, imo the even though the barycenter is outside Pluto, Charon's orbit is still a circle surrounding Pluto
True, but Pluto also circles Charon. That’s why they’re a binary planet.
@@Jellyman1129 but if you draw their orbits Charon's lies fully inside Pluto's
Vera C. Rubin Observatory will probably find it.
I love Pluto, the dwarf planet, but cannot stand the Disney dog, Pluto.
Well ahctulalalaly it is one of the suns many moons
Ceres went through all this classification stuff long ago. Since Ceres was ultimately, finally considered a dwarf planet back then, the concept of "dwarf planet" cannot be new.
Can it?
No Ceres was just one of the asteroids. Dwarf planet was actually coined by Alan Stern, who ironically doesn't agree with the classification.
@@troyheck4366He doesn’t agree with it because he coined “dwarf planet” to mean “small planet”, analogous to “dwarf star” and “dwarf galaxy”. The IAU completely botched it and used the term to define something entirely different, making fools of themselves.
Some say this planet exist...and have advanced life on it ..
Maybe as some say those Annunaki came from that planet who has a very long distance rotation from the solar system...
Some say about 3000 years...or maybe more...
And some say this planet soon will be visible...
what about ruling that the barycentre of a planet must lie wholly inside itself?
That’s not a requirement to be a planet. There are binary stars and binary asteroids with barycenters between both objects, and now we know binary planets exist too. Where the barycenter is located doesn’t matter.
@@Jellyman1129 I know it is not a requirement - I suggest it as a further identifying characteristic, solving the question of whether Pluto is or is not a planet. nowt to do with stars or asteroids
@@alasdairwhyte6616 It’s useful as a descriptor. Pluto and Charon are a binary planet because the barycenter lies between them. But it’s not useful to *define* a planet by its barycenter location because it gives inconsistent results.
What about Eris?
Eris is widely accepted as a dwarf planet. Thanks for watching!
@@InsaneCuriosity aka the second largest dwarf planet and most massive dwarf planet
👍good
Is this AI or does this guy really not know how to promounce one of the most famous names in modern astronomy?
I think the moon classification is a major issue here. Why does it even exist?
What do you mean? Elaborate.
Pluto was named after the ruler of the Greek underworld from their mythology, as well as the rest of the planets, and not after an cartoon dog...
BTW Plutos moon - Charon was named after the ferryman of the underworld.
Pluto was named after the Roman ruler. Hades is the Greek equivalent.
Pluto is tired of this toxic family it belongs to and will leave to find itself 😢😂
Well there are much what if in those things ..
Personally I do not reject nothing yet until it is proven something...
Ahhh, do some astronomers need more attention, are we going to change our sun to no longer a sun but a fluffy bag of gas so we can get some attention. Do you need more acknowledgement?
I guess the Sun isn’t a star anymore, it’s a dwarf star. And it must be scientific fact because a handful of inexperienced astronomers voted on it.
Seriously, the IAU should be embarrassed. They’re the laughing stock of the astronomical community.
PLUTO IS A PLANET, STOP IT 😂
SHaron!!!
Doesn't the SUN have Gravitational pull? If so wouldn't some debris of planet forming have been drawn with gravity into the Sun ?😮I hear about the gravity of distant Stars coming into play and gravity of Planets also effecting bodies , in or out of orbit, seems that a body of most sizes that is not in orbit should head towards a Planet or the CLOSEST STAR THE SUN ❤
Who cares. They exist, no matter how we classify them
Pluto is one of the greatest debate!
@@InsaneCuriosity the debate doesn't change whether or not it exists, so it's really just a human factor
Yeah really. It's not like we blew it up like Alderaan in Star Wars.
Taxonomy is important and classifying objects is something that must be done right. The IAU didn’t do it right.
@@Jellyman1129 why? Pluto exists, no matter what you and IAU call it
It's a dwarf planet let it go
No, don't let it go. No one should accept a bad definition just because time has passed.
I was really unhappy when it was reclassified. But you know, it really does make sense. There are so many plutoids out there with really eccentric orbits. I mean, should we define Vesta as a planet (in the asteroid belt)?
@@mjblcmichael Vesta is a borderline case, as is Pallas. I disagree about the IAU definition making sense. Its major problem is that it classifies objects first and foremost by where they are rather than by what they are. Location should not be given primacy over an object's intrinsic properties. Pluto has complex geology much like the terrestrial planets. That type of geology starts happening when an object is large enough to be rounded by its own gravity. Eccentric orbits alone do not disaqualify an object from being a planet. There are giant exoplanets that have orbits around their stars that are much more eccentric than Pluto's is around the Sun. If those objects aren't planets, what are they?
The reason they made Pluto a dwarf planet is because after Eris they thought they'd find many Pluto sized objects in the Kuiper Belt so they preemptively demoted Pluto. That never happened thus Plutos demotion and the abomination of a definition that justified it were completley pointless.
@@commodorezero So, is Eris a planet, then?
First!
Pluto should stay a dwarf planets. it makes more sense as a dwarf planet.
It makes sense as a “dwarf planet” as in “a planet that is small”. It doesn’t make sense as an entirely different object.
Let it go. It made some sense to change it to a dwarf planet. Stop changing the definition just to suit your own needs.
Tell that to the IAU. They changed the definition just so school kids wouldn’t have to memorize more than nine planets. THEY’RE the irrational ones.