3 ms·
It's a weird issue because really it's all vaguely arbitrary distinctions. There's nothing really different between the various celestial bodies and at the sam
by bena 8y ago
It's a weird issue because really it's all vaguely arbitrary distinctions.
There's nothing really different between the various celestial bodies and at the same time they're all so vastly different from each other. You have planetary satellites larger than some planets. A couple of planets that are pretty much failed stars.
Even things like comets and asteroids, they're really just defined by behavior. I mean the definition of asteroid is basically "not a planet or comet".
It's basically all "stuff in space".
- Retric 8y ago> arbitrary distinctions. Exactly, the current definition of planet is not that useful. If a moon happens to exist in the goldilocks zone it could easily support life even if it's sitting next to a Jupiter sized planet that does not.