• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    21 month ago

    The current classification is a mess.

    IMO, it should be a planet iff it can hold an atmosphere. I.e., it doesn’t actually have to have an atmosphere, but if it had any, it should have enough surface gravity to hold that one.

    If you define it that way, Pluto is just barely a planet.

    • zqps
      link
      fedilink
      81 month ago

      So whatever hypothetical density constitutes an atmosphere becomes the arbitrary line in the sand.

      • Spzi
        link
        fedilink
        11 month ago

        Similar to the arbitrarily defined density of other stuff in the same orbit. We need to draw lines somewhere to impose categories on nature.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 month ago

        Well, yeah. But even so, it’s still better than the current definition. Many “planets” have not, in fact, cleared their orbit.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          101 month ago

          Planet has never been very well delineated. The Sun was a “planet”. Ceres was a “planet”.

          When we find enough things to break up the classification, we make a new classification. Like “asteroid” or “dwarf planet” or “gas giant”.