this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
360 points (98.9% liked)

Comic Strips

15150 readers
1556 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] j4k3@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (7 children)

I'm a Universalist. It is all the same thing at different phases of matter at various temperatures and pressures combined with the gravity to hold onto various materials. Keep stacking Earths over and over and you will eventually get a gas giant then a star then a black hole.

What I will never support is the stupidity of defining any object by external criteria. If a gravitationally bound world is acted upon in a way that shifts its orbit, the object cannot be redefined. This is a definition of a state, not an object. Planet, as defined by the IAU is not a noun. Such is what I expect when a highschool teacher wrote a definition instead of actual planetary scientists. I suppose such draconian nonsense was intended to show the backwardness and medieval state of the science of astronomy.

[–] adb@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago (3 children)

You can hide behind fancy words but clearly this is just being simplistic

[–] j4k3@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] adb@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I’m sorry if you didn’t get my lame joke over the fact that the universalist and simplistic definitions of planets give the same result in the comic

[–] j4k3@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Sorry I missed it. This issue is a pet peeve. We're in the golden age of discovery of new worlds and true extent of the Sol system, but are totally neglecting the significance of this one time in history.

load more comments (3 replies)