I dunno, a dwarf planet is still a planet, just a sub category. I still think it is a useful distinction. Same with moons: their primary orbit is around their host planet, not the sun. In the end all phylogenies are somewhat arbitrary, and should be judged by their usefulness. Excellent video, and it is good to have you back.
I grew up with Pluto being a planet, so to me Pluto will always be a planet. What gets me is that Mercury is called a planet even though it's smaller than some moons that orbit other planets, so I don't think size should determine whether a body is classified as a planet or not. Our own moon could be considered a planet on its own and we could actually be considered to be a double planet system. Either way, Pluto is a planet, I don't care what scientists say. They don't get to change the meaning of something just because they feel like it.
@@bluedotdwellerI agree. We should do a survey on what hundreds of planetary scientists define a planet as and encourage people to use whichever definition takes the majority. Unless there is no overwhelming majority opinion, in which case we should get some planetary scientists to gather and decide on a definition.
Excellent and thorough instructional video. I’m fascinated by our fellow planet’s moons. There is so much fascinating variety. It should be time to send craft to further examine the atmospheres and underground oceans.
Topic well covered! Not sure I agree that we should lump over 100 objects into the definition of "planet" but I absolutely agree that the large moons of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune, and the dwarf planets deserve more coverage and respect and that there is very little difference from a planetary science/geology perspective between the small planets and the Large Moons.
I'm so happy to get the long answer to a comment I left on your first video when I found and binged watched your channel. I'm the facts over feelings except with Pluto guy. With Pluto my heart rules my head. Completely agree with the kids ability to learn point and nice to hear from others who have a similar faith in the abilities of mankind.
Another fun thing to think about concerning the current, very arbitrary classification of planets: Since Pluto crosses Neptune's orbit, can we really say that Neptune has cleared its orbit? Is Neptune really a planet? Lol
It's also unclear what that even means. Does that include clearing your orbit of asteroids and trojans? Or only planetary mass objects? Or a specific number of asteroids? Does it mean your orbit has to be cleared MOST of the time but not other times?? Did the IAU make it clear what it means and I just missed it? Because if they haven't... WHAT DOES IT MEAN?? It's important because it will determine if even EARTH is a planet or not.
Well at some point we'll run out of gods to name things after, so why not? I googled it and there's several newly discovered species of animals named after Pokémon so it's not totally out of the question.
If even moons that are irregularly shaped and orbits in a debris field (pandora and prometheus) are still considered moons, then all the rest should be considered planets.
Totally agree. Think its beautiful, and appropriate, that the Solar System has the same number of planetary objects as Dunbar's Number, about 150, cognitive limit to the number of people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships!
I think it would be hilarious if the search for Planet 9 did turn up a gas giant in the Kuiper Belt--one that couldn't clear its orbit because there's so much orbit to clear! Also, a very sad note on the Catholic Church's view on the geocentric universe: It was a philosophy that really had no place in the Church's doctrine, as it came not from any Jewish scholar, but from the Greeks, who had an entirely different belief system than the one Catholicism came from.
Heres my 2 cents on classification; make a relatively arbitrary size the limit to make a planet such. It must be smaller than pluto and perhaps even be called the pluto law. The result of the number being our observations of the sizes that 'generally' make planetesque shapes. If theres too many funky shapes in the same size, make the number higher. Raising the number would see tons of smaller bodies drop off the list of planet and we could, thru definition, celebrate our technology in discovering all of them
Excellent video, but I do have a small remark though. It is a mistake that a lot of people make but Galileo Galilei was not the inventor of the telescope and neither was he the first ever to observe the other planets with it. Hans Lippershey invented the telescope in 1608 and made the patent application in that same year, Galileo created his own first telescope a little more than a year later in 1609.
You're absolutely correct! I do mention this in my video ' How the telescope unlocked the universe'. For the sake of brevity I didn't go deeper into it in this video.
In response to the bit about the Catholic Church: Build a man a fire and you keep him warm for a night. Set a man on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life 😌
@@DanielJStromme I know what it is, I'm well aware of the scientific definitions that have changed over the years, I just just pasting a simple answer to your simple question. It wasn't for my benefit, don't worry about me, lol. If you want a deeper discussion on it, you have to ask why terms are defined in a particular way and what purpose they serve. Context is everything.
I dunno, a dwarf planet is still a planet, just a sub category. I still think it is a useful distinction. Same with moons: their primary orbit is around their host planet, not the sun. In the end all phylogenies are somewhat arbitrary, and should be judged by their usefulness. Excellent video, and it is good to have you back.
How am I just discovering this channel?! This is awesome!
Thank you!
Same lol
I grew up with Pluto being a planet, so to me Pluto will always be a planet. What gets me is that Mercury is called a planet even though it's smaller than some moons that orbit other planets, so I don't think size should determine whether a body is classified as a planet or not. Our own moon could be considered a planet on its own and we could actually be considered to be a double planet system. Either way, Pluto is a planet, I don't care what scientists say. They don't get to change the meaning of something just because they feel like it.
Even scientists don't agree on how to define what a planet is. But I think planetary scientists are completely in the right.
@@bluedotdwellerI agree. We should do a survey on what hundreds of planetary scientists define a planet as and encourage people to use whichever definition takes the majority. Unless there is no overwhelming majority opinion, in which case we should get some planetary scientists to gather and decide on a definition.
Excellent and thorough instructional video. I’m fascinated by our fellow planet’s moons. There is so much fascinating variety. It should be time to send craft to further examine the atmospheres and underground oceans.
Topic well covered! Not sure I agree that we should lump over 100 objects into the definition of "planet" but I absolutely agree that the large moons of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune, and the dwarf planets deserve more coverage and respect and that there is very little difference from a planetary science/geology perspective between the small planets and the Large Moons.
I'm so happy to get the long answer to a comment I left on your first video when I found and binged watched your channel. I'm the facts over feelings except with Pluto guy. With Pluto my heart rules my head. Completely agree with the kids ability to learn point and nice to hear from others who have a similar faith in the abilities of mankind.
That last section is the best poetry about the the moons/planets of the solar system since Syd Barrett wrote Astronomy Domine.
Another fun thing to think about concerning the current, very arbitrary classification of planets:
Since Pluto crosses Neptune's orbit, can we really say that Neptune has cleared its orbit? Is Neptune really a planet? Lol
Oh wow, you're right, that never occurred to me, that's so funny!
It's also unclear what that even means. Does that include clearing your orbit of asteroids and trojans? Or only planetary mass objects? Or a specific number of asteroids? Does it mean your orbit has to be cleared MOST of the time but not other times?? Did the IAU make it clear what it means and I just missed it? Because if they haven't... WHAT DOES IT MEAN?? It's important because it will determine if even EARTH is a planet or not.
Loving this channel man!😊
Well, since there's 150 original pokemon, does that mean we should name all the unnamed potential planets after pokemon?
Well at some point we'll run out of gods to name things after, so why not? I googled it and there's several newly discovered species of animals named after Pokémon so it's not totally out of the question.
@@bluedotdweller Dibs on naming the a binary system Mew and Mewtwo
Another very informative vid, well done and tyvm!!
We should all be happy for Pluto. He got a whole new family and he was suddenly the biggest in his group!!😁
I’m still here after Cool Worlds gave you a shout out several months ago.
Happy to have you around :)
If even moons that are irregularly shaped and orbits in a debris field (pandora and prometheus) are still considered moons, then all the rest should be considered planets.
Totally agree. Think its beautiful, and appropriate, that the Solar System has the same number of planetary objects as Dunbar's Number, about 150, cognitive limit to the number of people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships!
You're making my brain work hard! ❤️
I think it would be hilarious if the search for Planet 9 did turn up a gas giant in the Kuiper Belt--one that couldn't clear its orbit because there's so much orbit to clear!
Also, a very sad note on the Catholic Church's view on the geocentric universe: It was a philosophy that really had no place in the Church's doctrine, as it came not from any Jewish scholar, but from the Greeks, who had an entirely different belief system than the one Catholicism came from.
Heres my 2 cents on classification; make a relatively arbitrary size the limit to make a planet such. It must be smaller than pluto and perhaps even be called the pluto law. The result of the number being our observations of the sizes that 'generally' make planetesque shapes. If theres too many funky shapes in the same size, make the number higher. Raising the number would see tons of smaller bodies drop off the list of planet and we could, thru definition, celebrate our technology in discovering all of them
and a new classification to the smaller bodies shall be named: "Celestial Moons"
That they are in orbit around the sun as a moon of the sun
How many level bodies of water does it take to make a globe?
as we seem to live in a Plutocracy in AmUSa its probly bad press 3, i mean 4 them to mention pluto at all
Excellent video, but I do have a small remark though. It is a mistake that a lot of people make but Galileo Galilei was not the inventor of the telescope and neither was he the first ever to observe the other planets with it. Hans Lippershey invented the telescope in 1608 and made the patent application in that same year, Galileo created his own first telescope a little more than a year later in 1609.
You're absolutely correct! I do mention this in my video ' How the telescope unlocked the universe'. For the sake of brevity I didn't go deeper into it in this video.
I miss you!
Name of 39 planets near the earth..
In response to the bit about the Catholic Church: Build a man a fire and you keep him warm for a night. Set a man on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life 😌
I feel terrible for laughing at this 💀
@@bluedotdweller you should
so witty .. hahahahahah duh u suck
fuck u dude dissing the catholics.. is punching down wouldnt you agree.. nope now go vote biden right? let me guess???
👍
Sorry I'm late.
wdym this video isn't going anywhere :D happy you're here!
True, what is a planet?!
A planet is a large, rounded astronomical body that is neither a star nor its remnant.
So then a "rounded" moon is a planet? Planetary maybe! Is there a difference?! "Planetary" doesn't mean planet. Neither does "astronomical."
@@DanielJStromme I copied and pasted from the thesaurus. Go write a letter to someone if that doesn't please you.
Copy and paste, well done! No real sense in knowing the difference, as long as the book says? You're setting yourself up.
@@DanielJStromme I know what it is, I'm well aware of the scientific definitions that have changed over the years, I just just pasting a simple answer to your simple question. It wasn't for my benefit, don't worry about me, lol. If you want a deeper discussion on it, you have to ask why terms are defined in a particular way and what purpose they serve. Context is everything.
⊂(^(工)^)⊃