Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
How Many Planets There ACTUALLY Are
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 окт 2022
- Everyone remembers the day Pluto was downgraded from a planet to a "dwarf planet." But what was the real motive behind this decision, and what else might the IAU been trying to hide?
www.iau.org/news/pressrelease...
www.iau.org/news/pressrelease...
www.sandiegouniontribune.com/...
archive.org/details/galileoat...
mitchellarchives.com/the-disco...
www.google.com/books/edition/...
web.albion.edu/images/sites/n...
www.esa.int/About_Us/ESA_hist...
www.thehindu.com/children/pal...
spaceweather.com/swpod2006/13...
philsci-archive.pitt.edu/3418/
web.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/pl...
web.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/pa...
authors.library.caltech.edu/34...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50000_Q...
arxiv.org/abs/1604.07461
iopscience.iop.org/article/10...
solarsystem.nasa.gov/resource...
www.iau.org/public/themes/nam...
www.skyatnightmagazine.com/sp...
www.iau.org/news/pressrelease...
www.loc.gov/everyday-mysterie...
www.loc.gov/item/webcast-7161/
had.aas.org/resources/aashist...
www.iau.org/public/themes/nam...
www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014...
www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/vo...
www.dlr.de/content/en/images/...
A tiny, moving point of light - the discovery of Pluto - DLR Portalonlineonly.christies.com/s/eu...
www.atticusrarebooks.com/page...
www.rarenewspapers.com/view/5...
www.rarenewspapers.com/view/5...
www.rarenewspapers.com/view/5...
www.flickr.com/photos/bowbric...
www.nasa.gov/newhorizons/happ...
www.loc.gov/resource/hhh.az03...
solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/...
www.newyorker.com/magazine/20...
www.johnstonsarchive.net/astro...
tulsaworld.com/archive/scienc...
www.space.com/25817-quaoar.html
astrobiology.nasa.gov/news/pl....
svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/12278
svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000...
www.physics.nau.edu/~trujillo...
phys.org/news/2015-08-dwarf-p...
webbtelescope.org/news/first-...
The three second pause after introducing Uranus is the equivalent of a laugh track
Good to know I'm not the only one who perceived it like that :D
The 12 year old in me laughed
*soft piano notes*
Needed a cricket noise.
Agreed but far more effective.
Humans really love to sort stuffs in boxes. It helps us a lot, but nature really loves to tell us that it couldnt care less about our boxes.
Actually, we are looking at nature's boxes and simply labelling them.
@@RideAcrossTheRiver No, nature doesn't have boxes. Nature doesn't care. OP was correct, we create our own boxes.
@@RideAcrossTheRiver No, we try to simplify reality to reduce complexity, but nature is just inherently complex. That's why semantics will always be debated.
@@gljames24 We observe a loose association of body types in our solar system. Same for stars and galaxies.
I do really wish people would stop insisting that the boxes themselves are some sort of objective truth, and I am sad that he stooped to doing that at the end of the video.
I think we all sleep on the fact Ceres got an upgrade from "Asteroid" to "Dwarf Planet."
And it is visible in a 4 inch telescope, which was preaty cool, when I found it one night. It resolved as a neat little circle in the eyepiece.
(Neptune and Uranus generally resolve as little blue pinprick dots if you find them- and really need a bit of a bigger telescope)
Of course, asteroids have for the longest time been classified as "minor planets".
must have been a 4 inch refractor....price really jumps up from going from 3.3 inch to a 4inch.
I believe it has been seen by the naked eye by people with extremely good night vision at high elevation dark sky sites.
@accelerationquanta5816 No it isn't. It fails one category.
@accelerationquanta5816 Well since I was one of the people responsible for the criteria required (2006 IAU resolution) I think I might know this. To be considered a planet the object has to have cleared its orbit - Ceres has not done that.
The definition is:
A "planet" is a celestial body inside the Solar System that
(a) is in orbit around the Sun,
(b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape,
(c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit.
So, 20+ planets is just too hard to teach, and there are how many Pokémon now? I think the kids can handle it.
1,025
how do we teach kids about some icy object that’s name sounds like a cat walked across a keyboard
@@astronliketheancientgreekword seems easy enough
Calling them Plutoids instead of Icesteroids is one of the biggest misses in astronomical history.
Damn I wish I'd thought of Icesteroids 😂
@@astropro1 it was an appeal to the emotional pluto lovers who won't shut up after 16 years
Plutoid is a nice homage to dear old Pluto but we really need something more scientific.
@@astropro1 In fairness, cryasteroids sounds way more scientific
I cryo'd 🥶😭
Haumea is the most criminally underrated object in the entire solar system
yup
yea
It's not a crime it's a felony
The great egg in the sky needs its voice heard
@@tartine2463 You made me spit out my water, but I'm not angry.
I've always wanted to see a near complete model of the solar system. With features like the kuiper belt, the oort cloud, hills cloud, all of the planetoids, all of jupiter's moons, the trans-neptunian objects like Sedna and Haumea, to name a couple, the asteroid belt and the significantly sized asteroids that we've named. Plus the usual details like planets etc.
Imagine having to model each asteroid they found💀
@@el-verdadero_mordecai-456 There are probably a ton more models in a large open sandbox type game like Breath of the Wild, GTA V, or something else I haven't played. Sorry, not big on gaming.
I've often wondered how people deal with tasks like that. Not as complicated as modeling large amounts of objects, that's way beyond me. But just entering information into a massive database. Like say, you want to start a dictionary site. You'd need a database with all of your words in it for the website to consult whenever somebody searches. Sorry if this is too simplistic I just don't want to assume any prior knowledge and cause confusion. And I just think about how many tens of thousands of UNIQUE entries they have in each entry in the database. And every one of them had to be entered by a person.
Again, I'm no expert, but I'm sure they have ways to automate it to a degree. For example to digitize books, I found an app where you just point your camera at a page in a book and it turns it into a pdf document. But aside from hiring people at slave wages to do data entry for you, I dunno how they would fill even a database with 10k entries.
And yeah, then you get into video games you suddenly you have databases of objects that have to be called in a very specific manner at very specific events. The database itself may have just as many items, but the way they're interacted with is way more complex than just a user searching for one at a time.
And nevermind actually making the maps for these games. Like Breath of the Wild's map is apparently about the size of Manhatten! Give or take, of course. But looking at other games, that's about the size of the maps for some of these large ones. You've gotta think about a game like GTA V where they had to recreate large parts of LA, although I guess a good bit of the groundwork was already done in San Andreas. But they still basically had to start from a vague template. Not to mention, as big as San Andreas' map was, V's dwarfs it. I'm curious how big VI's will be.
@@VoidHalo Nope, Not even close, the amount of KBOs is staggering
Universe Sandbox only renders the important ones, and all others are just a generic dust cloud
Just go look at Space Engine. It's not perfect but good enough.
The I.A.U hurt Pluto's feelings and laugh at Pluto and calling Pluto names right?
"Planetoid" is the only fitting name, because they are tiny planets; I think that is the name I was taught in Astronomy in college (I was taught it somewhere), and now I know why. We have two very different kinds of planets, and so there is nothing wrong with two very different kinds of planetoids.
only 2 different kinds of planets?
I don't know bro I don't normally put the 4 rocks in the same bag as the 4 gas giants
Neptune and Uranus are considered ice giants so wouldn't it be 3?
In 1987 in the 6th grade I said I didn't think Pluto was a planet. We hadn't discovered the Kuiper Belt yet, but science knew comets came from the outer solar system. That there were a bunch of ice chunks out there and occasionally one got bumped toward the inner solar system and became a comet. I think it was called the ice belt. I thought it was like the asteroid belt, just ice instead of rock. I said Pluto was just an above average size ice chunk. The teacher said it was a planet because it had an atmosphere and a moon. I said comets have atmospheres and if it came closer to the sun it would have a tail. And I said there are asteroids with other asteroids orbiting them, they aren't planets. Pluto even has an off plane elliptical orbit like a comet. Not the best technical definition, but I was 11 and had just thought this up 2 minutes earlier.
The teacher said "That is the stupidest thing I have heard in my entire life." So I was thrilled in 2006 when Pluto got demoted. I hope my 6th grade teacher was still alive and remembered calling me stupid.
@@BrettonFerguson BURN! American school system be like:
@@WinVisten Yes america schools.
The same teacher once said the Earth's inner core was molten metal. I corrected her and said the outer core was liquid, but the inner core was a solid. She said I was stupid because the core was like 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit so the Iron would be melted. I said melting temperature increases with pressure. At that point she told me to go to the principal's office "for being a smart ass".
The human ability to argue about massive rocks floating in space half a light-year away is frankly astonishing.
Yeah, it's crazy that we argue about the smallest particles to the biggest galaxies, but also kind of impressive that we have the means to do that at all.
Sorry if I'm taking this too seriously and you were just making an exaggeration, but you went a bit far there. The planets are several to dozens of astronomical units away. A light year is used for interstellar distances where rogue planets and stars would inhabit, and is many thousands of times further away.
Kuiper Belt is not rocky bodies. They are icy bodies.
@@RideAcrossTheRiver also these are way closer than half a light year. It's less than a thousandth of a lightyear.
Pluto is like half a light day away if not closer.
Pluto, apparently not even in the solar system.
Wait, Ceres has 33% of the mass on the asteroid belt? That's amazing.
We totally need to move all mining operations out there asap.
No need to mine on Earth for Space-based equipment / resources beyond the first few generations.
@@TechRyze -- That might not be as useful for resources though. Ceres is mostly Rock, Ice, Salt, and Clay. There's some graphite and sulphur too. The heavier elements may have sank to the core over billions of years of cryovolcanism.
All that water is great for a station though. Lots of propellant for rockets, lots of water for easy shielding from radiation, and lots of drinks for the monkeys! Asteroids for mining could be towed into orbit, and the refining equipment kept near the (relative) comfort of a full station.
Exactly why it's cool. It's such a massive object in the belt. It would be cool if more people knew about it.
@@TechRyze What is there to mine? And what use even were it found?
@@eannamcnamara9338 1 Ceres is only 11 percent the mass of the Moon.
Now I understand Pluto's demotion even better.
What I find pretty silly however is the reasoning behind their choice to make it simple for kids in school. I understand that too, but just because you want to make it simpler, that doesn't mean there is just 8 planets in the solar system.
I was in 2nd grade in 2005, so Pluto was among the planets we kids worked on. Can't remember what planet I worked on.. could have been Mercury?
Regardless, I would have LOVED to have even more planets to read about in school! Space is so fascinating!
There are 9 planets in our solar system and 4 known planetoids.
Alright then learn all asteroids and TNOs [insert gru holding you on gunpoint here]
To make it simpler, they could’ve just chosen to only teach the classical nine planets while still recognizing there are more out there. You can have your cake and eat it too. Voting to change scientific facts is not science, nor is the motivation behind it valid.
It's okay to disagree with the IAU's arbitrary third criteria.
@@ulfrinn8783 Yeah, I don’t know why people think the IAU has the final word of this subject. It’s clear that they don’t and many people already ignore their definition, myself included.
This is easily the best explanation I’ve ever heard about this subject. Good work.
Dude, I really have to say that you're an exceptional RUclipsr. The effort you put into your videos has gone to the point where you have taken some of the first steps to properly visualize and render what has previously been abstract and distant into something tangible and clear. You painstakingly rendered like over 20 celestial objects, many of which have never been rendered to the level of detail you've done here. I've been with you on Atlas Pro since before 100k and I'm so excited to see what you do on this channel.
A couple of corrections:
9:14 Piazzi did not join the search, his find of Ceres was actually a huge concidence!
31:03 there has never actually been an anomaly in Neptune's orbit, we have long found out that our estimates of the mass of Neptune were slightly off (by taking actual measurements when Voyager 2 passed right next to it). The hypothesis for another big boy planet this time is based on the orbits of kuiper belt objects that are too far to be affected by Neptune, Sedna included
other than that, great video, people who complain about Pluto clearly have never heard about the story of the asteroid belt so I'm glad you took the time to explain how it shows that this was just a repeat of history 👍
I know people say Piazzi finding Ceres was a coincidence but I really doubt it. My guess is the celestial police didn’t ask him to look for it, so when he heard about it anyway and actually found it, the police lied and said his letter “must’ve gotten lost,” which remains the official story. I find it almost impossible to believe he found Ceres without knowing where to look first.
@@astropro1 I guess it is possible yeah. But "officially" he was not part of the group and just so happened to be systematically surveying that part of the sky correcting star charts he was in possession of 🤔
Damn. I was totally theorizing that Neptune's orbit was being deformed by the wormhole left out there by previous visitors.
Also if im not wrong there was some measurement whose calculated value (as per the newtonian model) wasnt aligned with the observed value; but what it turned out to be was that that newtonian model was fundamentally flawed in the sense that the main gravitational equation was "incorrect", and that when people used Einstein's theory of general relativity to calculate the aforementioned value they got something that lined up with the observed value.
@@elle9834 That was Mercury
Very good way to explain the history of planet naming. This really put a great context on it, that at one time we had even more than 9 planets and how that was trimmed down to 9, and now down to 8. That is until Planet 9 is discovered.
This is the first time I stumbled upon your channel and I must say I am impressed. This video is absolutely amazing, you deserve way more subscribers.
Keep in mind that with Sedna, there should be many similarly-sized objects on super long orbits like that. And perhaps even Mars-sized or even Earth-sized objects scattered among them as well. Finding Sedna really opens the door to the possibility of vast amounts of stuff on highly eccentric orbit.
I have a theory that the long awaited planet 9 might be an object so distant that it takes hundreds of thousands of years to complete it's orbit arround the sun, maybe a former rogue planet ?
Do i have anything to support this ? No lol, but it's cool to theorize.
If such an object were to be discovered, I assume the IAU will change their definitions again. It seems weird to have a Kuiper belt object the size of Mars or the Earth that isn't classified as a planet.
@@PyroBlaze202_alt um, there are no "Earth-sized" objects in Kuiper. Triton, Neptune's moon, is the largest. Triton is not even as large as the Moon.
@@jeffdeischer8692, none have been discovered. But, as far as I understand, one could be discovered. which is what I'm referencing in my comment.
@@PyroBlaze202_alt I wouldn’t doubt it. The IAU botched the definition to begin with, it’ll be obsolete in no time.
The fact it has a giant heart on it just hurts. Such a loveable little guy.
=Timeline of the Planets=
(1610)
*Mercury joined the game*
*Venus joined the game*
*Earth joined the game*
*Mars joined the game*
*Jupiter joined the game*
*Saturn joined the game*
(1781)
*Uranus joined the game*
(1801)
*Ceres joined the game*
(1802)
*Pallas joined the game*
(1804)
*Juno joined the game*
(1807)
*Vesta joined the game*
(1846)
*Neptune joined the game*
(1851)
*Ceres left the game*
*Pallas left the game*
*Juno left the game*
*Vesta left the game*
(1930)
*Pluto joined the game*
(2005)
*Eris joined the game*
(2006)
*Pluto left the game*
*Eris left the game*
P.S.: I think Asteroids should be named "Geoids" and the Dwarf Planets "Cryiods".
Dude I had fallen asleep watching something about a telescope. This played while I was half dozing. I recognized you from your Atlas channel, and assumed this was from that channel for some reason.
At the end of the video I saw this was a new channel. I'm absolutely on board, what a great video that was.
the 3 seconds after Uranus's introduction and then the subtle piano when the audience is waiting for the punchline that's never coming is the best thing that has happened to me this week.
He didn't need a punchline, the audience knows the joke and the silence was just enough time to think of it and laugh before the content resumes. (We are all children)
we're never mature when it comes to uranus (audience laugh)
The silent pause after saying uranus was just too funny, but it be interesting to find out why they decided to name it that.
10:51 "Not my anus Uranus" 💀
@@guestiveuranus isn't a laughing matter ... uranus is huge full of gas and very important!
I'm a presenter/educator/communicator at a planetarium, and here are my thoughts on the subject. I think a lot of the controversy comes from the lack of teaching about the dwarf planets. I think that term is fine and describes what they are, similar to planets but smaller. It's just that when people talk about the Solar System and exclude the dwarf planets, of which Pluto is the one everyone knows, it doesn't satisfy peoples curiosity and desire to understand. I know this because I was in that position, being an elementary school kid in 2006 during the IAU scandal, and had read about Eris and other unnamed objects discovered beyond Pluto and wanted people to tell me more about them. By teaching people about the biggest of the dwarf planets (Ceres in the asteroid belt, Pluto in the Kuiper Belt, and Eris in the scattered disc, maybe a few of the others like Haumea) it explains that there are other significant objects orbiting the Sun that are worth exploring. This can also be said of the major moons of the Solar System; if someone is going to learn about Pluto and Eris then they should also learn about the Galilean moons, the large moons of Saturn, Triton, along with the familiar moon of Earth. By acknowledging Pluto and the other dwarf planets, separate still from the asteroids, planetoids, and tiny objects around the Solar System, even if in a separate category than the major planets, people will be satisfied to know that they exist and are interesting little worlds in their own right. It's ok to call them dwarf planets; it's not ok to call them nothing at all, and ommit them from existence.
This I can agree with. Pluto, Eris, and large round moons are just as interesting as planets, sometimes even more so (Titan is a lot more awesome than Mercury). Omitting them from Solar System models does them a great injustice as despite being called “dwarf” planets, these are very large objects, thousands of times larger than asteroids.
Learn to edit. C+
Hey, why not present/communicate/ or educate at the planetarium the possibility that Mercury is Venus' moon.
@@atomicplanets8226Mercury does not orbit Venus??? What the hell are you on?
Nobody loses interest in a celestial obeject because it's called a dwarf. Just to acknowledge that means that you are interested in astronomy to begin with. Most people couldn't care less. The real argument is on a precise definition of a planet.
Best description or example of why Pluto was reclassified. I was at one time thinking on becoming an astronomer back in 1975. The dean of astronomy at the University of Washington sat me down and gave me information about what it takes and a lot of other information about astronomy that I opted out of that route. LOL My math was a bit lacking, He he. However I thought I was pretty much up on astronomy except now with this much more concise, informative video I realize I really didn't know that answer, but now I do. Thank you. 👨🎓
Information overload!! I don’t think I’ve ever had that much new information given to me in that amount of time. Well done!! New subscriber.
Love your terminology! You could even shorten those two terms to geoids and cryoids. (Asteroid means star-like, which… they’re really not at all.)
Atleast star-like makes sense in the context of being a point of light in the sky. But obviously we now know that is about the only similarity between asteroids and stars. (Tiny rocks vs giant perpetual nuclear explosions)
Geoid already has a meaning, so I thought terroid might be better... however, a quick Google search found that to be taken as well.
@@RuthBingham words can have many meaning associated to it
to be fair we still use the words galaxy and galactic, so asteroid honestly isn't that big of a deal considering that most people nowadays think of a big space rock when they hear asteroid and not something star-like
@@Mahlak_Mriuani_Anatman in this case, science doesn't like using identical terms for very different things if possible. Especially not when we're using classifying words. The entire point of classification is to maximally delineate as definitively as possible.
I remember hearing about Quaoar being discovered while I was in grade school, so for a while I included it as the 10th planet in the solar system.
Which really highlights the main reason why Pluto had to be excluded: Because any division between Pluto and the other Kuiper Belt objects would be far more arbitrary than a division between Pluto and the gas giants.
Also, seeing that table of planets with their mass/neighborhood ratio really cements the drastic difference between them and the objects in the Asteroid and Kuiper Belts.
Well, no. Pluto would stay a planet and Quaoar would get added. Also, Pluto’s mass in comparison to its orbit is so minuscule because it’s so far away, hence why Earth’s mass is greater than Jupiter’s shown on that graph. If Earth were moved to Pluto’s distance from the sun, it would suddenly not be a planet.
g!kúnǁ'hòmdímà
@@handledav What you said is a dwarf planet candidate, 2007 UK126
@accelerationquanta5816 Apparently astronomers couldn’t cope with the existence of more planets. They’re fine with billions of stars and galaxies, but planets reaching double digits is “too much”. Our solar system has hundreds of planets, they need to get used to it.
@@Jellyman1129Star” and “galaxy” are quite simply more general terms than “planet”. There are so many objects orbiting the sun that to say “well over a quintillion” wouldn’t even be an understatement, but only 8 of them are planets.
This was a very well done and thoughtfully researched video. Bravo!
The idea that Planet X could be a fairly close, but still way further away than Pluto, black hole is terrifying to me.(Some theories suggest that one or several ones orbit our sun) Like this seems like a straight irrational phobia, since it's pretty clear that it poses no danger to our system, but I just get the panic jabics, the heebie jeebies, the AAAAAAAAAAHHHH!!!!. I love black holes, but they are one of the few things in life that give me that deep, instinctual feeling of panic
I have so much respect for the part at 24:40, that's more effort put in trying to learn a completely foreign pronunciation than I've ever seen any other american do. And this is insane compared to trying to pronounce spanish, german and french, he did it right
Black hole orbits our sun? Are you high? Black hole are way more massive and they are center of masses of the galaxies. So, in fact, it's other way around, the sun is orbiting a black hole, just like all the other stars in our galaxy.
@@rakhatthenut3815 You may be right, as insane as your comment sounds. This comparably tiny black hole would definitely change our sun's orbit around the galactic core, even if it has less than 2 solar masses
While I agree with the science behind classifying Pluto, Ceres, Eris & co. as "dwarf planets" I've always sorta longed for a separate classification for those larger Asteroid / Kuiper Belt objects. I think they deserve a bit more distinction from the little scraps of rock their regions are known for. Ceres, Pluto and Eris are better described as "proto-planets" as they really do display all the characteristics of regular planets, just not as developed as their larger cousins. I think Haumea could be included in this as well, with its own little ring system. Great video!
The question here is; when does a hill become a mountain.
Can I interest you in the term "centaur"?
@@BerryTheBnnuy isn't that only for things influenced by Jupiter's orbit?
So basically just "all the dwarf planets except Makemake"
*separate
I'll rate this as second best lecture on planetary classification I've heard. I went to one in college (I think presented by either Trujillo or Brown but I honestly don't remember) called "How I Killed Pluto and Why It Had It Coming" that's always stuck with me. Partly for the fantastic name, partly because prior to that lecture actually explaining the why behind Pluto's reclassification in an accessible way I was staunchly pro-planet-Pluto.
That must’ve been Mike! That’s the book he wrote about all this. That’s awesome, I wish I could go to a lecture of his!
@@astropro1 It was back in 2007 or 2008 but I remember it being really interesting. Great work from you on this video as well!
@@astropro1 Brown and his co-author have a good paper from last year predicting the orbit of a massive trans-neptunian body "Planet Nine". ~6.2x Earth Mass at >300AU!
@@alexreustle I'm betting if Planet Nine exists it has not cleared it's orbit (the further out an object is the more massive it has to be to "clear it's orbit") and so Brown is either going to have to give up the clear it's orbit thing or admit it is not a "planet" even though it would be an ice giant.
That's a hilarious title for a lecture
I think the part where you talk about how our ability to observe the universe exceeded our understanding of it is interesting because we're basically there again with dark matter
There is a noticable size difference between Pluto and Eris compared to the rest of the smaller objects. Maybe they aren't planets however I think in the future it might be helpful to classify them as something different.
somehow it's not being discussed that Pluto-Charon is actually closer to a binary PLanet system, ala the Centaurus system (3 stars in in orbital resonance), since the gravitational barycenter is well outside of Pluto's surface. Earth-Luna was the largest example of size relation of planet-satellite, until the details about Charon became better known. Add in the fact that both Pluto and Charon are tidally locked to each other, and it's a slam dunk.
*IAU* : There would be far too many planets. And more keep being found with increasingly awkward names. No kids would ever be able to learn from this ever growing list.
*Pokemon Company* : we started with 150 but now we're nearing 1,000 and we've increased the letter count in new names.
*Dinosaurs*: There’s over 1,000 species of us. Kids love it!
Yeah, it was a stupid decision for the IAU to limit the number. I guess we have to go back to eight states and eight elements. 🙄
@Jellyman1129 Kids don't learn all 1000
Meanwhile the periodic table:
Stellar first video and breakdown of our solar system's planetary history. I remember doing a school report on Pluto shortly before its demotion from planethood. Seems like the information we gather on the cosmos grows exponentially and I am excited about all the things we still have to learn and all the imagery that will come from our curiosity for the night sky. Can't wait to see what topics you decide to tackle and share with us next! 🌌
On the other hand by creating the concept of dwarf planet it raised Ceres from asteroid to dwarf planet. So that's cool. Ceres is an amazing celestial object, complex and dynamic, so to be classified as an asteroid would had been a diservice.
I also think the name Dwarf Planet is a cool name. Smaller doesnt mean less interesting or lesser. Peter Dinklage is no lesser of an actor despite being very short, is he?
Ceres was initially classified as a planet, but there wasn't a huge uproar when it was downgraded to asteroid. I guess because there was no internet back then.
@@Dulcimerist And people who loved astronomy acted more dignified and as adults back in the day.
@@carlossaraiva8213 Great point!
@@Dulcimerist Asteroids were a subset of planets back then (as with pretty much everything that's not either stars or comets). It wasn't until Kuiper's papers in 1950s that argued about asteroids' distinct physical differences from larger planets that they stopped being considered planets.
I think the reason for the lack of uproar was probably because Ceres was never really as popular as Pluto.
@@AstroChara Ceres is still very much a planet. Math isnt wrong the IAU is as ussual. No one in Astronmy agrees with that UN board of Selected politicians.
dude, that pause after announcing William Herschel's discovery....just long enough that I had to chuckle
It's funny -- as a kid I accepted that Pluto wasn't a planet right away because I assumed we had just learned more about our surroundings and were updating everyone on that. My first love was dinosaurs and science documentaries, so maybe I was just more comfortable with the idea that scientists were frequently revising things as we learned more and understood our findings in better ways
same thing here, to be honest, i don't even remember pluto being a planet itself, maybe i am too young. but, I've always heard about pluto being "no longer a planet" and accepted as an update on our conceptions, or new discoveries.
i was also a dino and documentary kid, up to the conception that science is not constant, since it is a way of creating knowledge, not the knowledge itself, so things we classify today as something will be classified as others as our understanding and classifications grow. maybe one day, pluto and other similar bodies will be once again planets.
Same here
I was in elementary school when the change happened and was also a nature/science documentary kid. Blue planet was awesome as a kid, and "Life" was really cool when it first came out.
I just accepted the change as the newest documentaries always had more info and corrections over older ones.
One thing that is really cool in the age of streaming is you can find a documentary series like "How the Universe Works" and watch season 1 through season 10, but its really cool to watch the season 1 episode on black holes and then watch the season 10 episode on the same topic. Both episodes are made with the same good faith and most up to date information but its hilarious how different they are, because newer data supports a different theory.
Don’t know why’d you immediately accept something without doing your own research. Seems gullible.
@@Jellyman1129 The 'research' in question was realizing that newer information from reputable sources all agreed it wasn't, and that when newer information is in agreement when it comes to science, it is usually more correct than the old information. That kind of critical thought is frankly pretty impressive for an elementary-age kid (or heck, even in most adults I would say); what else would you expect a kid to be able to do (or even the general public in this kind of situation, most people don't have private access to multi-million telescopes!
Also, what is the definition of a moon? Luna, about 380,000 km from Earth, orbits the Sun in almost exactly the same shape as Earth, is orders of magnitude closer to the ratio of the Earth than just about anything else in the Solar System other than Charon and Pluto, is also just as round as the Earth and is in hydrostatic equilibrium, and the Sun exerts much more force on it than the Earth does in fact, about twice as much.
That would suggest that Luna is a planet too, and certainly I imagine that if we made a bunch of colonies on it, for which we have a number of ideas as to how to do it and have actually physically been there, if they raised people there, they would probably think of their home to be just as important as Earth, Mars, Mercury, and others. Hell, Mercury even looks a lot like Luna.
Earth-Moon is a binary system, the center of gravity of the system makes it difficult to visualize.
The Moon would be called a planet if it orbited the Sun by itself.
Earth-Moon are a binary system. It is difficult to visualize because of the center of gravity of the system being so near earth, and because we are viewing it from the larger body, and because the binary system 'wobbles' through its orbit once every 28 days.
Isn't all of the moons are moons because they orbit a planet?
@@12duck123 Does the Moon really orbit the Earth? The gravitational force on the Moon from the Sun is twice that of Earth's pull. And what other body in the Solar system is even remotely close to being able to swing around the bigger body with such strength? Charon around Pluto is the only other rounded body in the Solar System that does this in addition to the Moon. The Moon can get the barycentre to about ⅔ the difference from the core to the surface. Not even Callisto, Ganymede, or Titan can do that with Jupiter and Saturn and they are bigger than Mercury. The shape of the Moon's orbit around the Sun is essentially a circle, and this is not true of any other rounded body in the solar system except for Charon, and the planets both dwarf and major.
This was really well done. What a presentation. Bravo!
This is the best and best-explained basic presentation on this and similar topics (such as transneptunian objects) I have ever seen.
I remember when I was a kid, they announced Sedna in the newspaper and I cut that piece out because I was so excited for a new planet!
I was really into space back then and space still interests me now!
Same feeling when Eris was found out. I thought it will be the tenth planet. 😔
I was in 5th grade when it was discovered and I remember saying to my friends that Sedna sounded like an insurance company.
I absolutely loved this video. It was so well done and I learned a lot about planetary classification in only 30 minutes!! I hope your channel keeps growing and keep up the great work!!
People should be happy for Pluto, it went from runt of the litter to king of the dwarves.
I love how you left a pause after the Uranus reveal, and it worked lol
very good video! a couple things:
1: as others have pointed out, the anomalies in Neptune's orbit were actually due to a mathematical error. once the correct values were punched in, the discrepancy between its predicted orbit and its actual orbit disappeared completely. i can't remember the details, and i'm too lazy to search rn, but if you harass me i might go look it up.
2: the search for Planet 9 has recently been renewed, as some astronomers have noticed a strange clustering of Kuiper Belt objects with highly elliptical orbits that all point roughly in the same direction, which suggests another planet may exist with an elliptical orbit in the opposite direction.
3: there is also the story of the planet Vulcan, which was hypothesized to orbit extremely close to the Sun to explain anomalies in Mercury's orbit. it later turned out that these anomalies were due to the incomplete nature of Newtonian physics, and were resolved with the introduction of Einstein's General Theory of Relativity.
im glad theyre trying to find a new planet, lets just hope it actually exists
Search for planet 8*
I don't know why they're pretending Earth fits in the definition of planet when there are two "uncleared" asteroids swinging around us lol
@@SoftBreadSoftware because, as Caelan pointed out in the video, its about the proportion between the planet's mass and the mass all of the things in its orbital path (because every planet - even Jupiter - is going to have stuff in its orbital path. hell, larger planets LIKE Jupiter are going to actually corral stuff into those places, which is why we get Trojans) and since Earth's mass dominates it's orbit, it is considered a planet. in fact, if a planet's orbit had to be totally clear all the time, the number of planets in our system would be a whopping 0.
@@4orks976 Earth's mass does not dominate its orbit, neither does Neptune now that you reminded me (hello Pluto)
It is much easier to retroactively move goalposts, make ammendmemts and special exceptions than to admit the semantics are not rigorous and change the diction, which is what they should have done in 2014-15 instead of the aforementioned damage control.
@@SoftBreadSoftware ok can you maybe come back here after you actually watch the goddamn video
and maybe learn a bit about basic astrophysics before you try to pass yourself off as someone who knows astrophysics
Or we could just teach kids at a young age that there's more than just planets and moons to our solar system off the bat. Kids are pretty smart and retain a lot of information, as long as the information is interesting to them and not just a memory test like most school is. I'm pretty sure it would help them as adults too, having already grasped a basic concept of the known solar system and everything that entails. There are a lot of physics that can come easier by knowing how orbits and gravity works.
Edit: I think it's kind of cruel to teach kids that life is simple, only for them to grow up and be overwhelmed with how complex reality is. It feels like lying by omission.
@accelerationquanta5816HARD AGREE. I'm totally teaching kids that there are dozens of planets. You don't need to memorize them, just like you don't need to memorize the 50 nearest stars, just some important ones. We already often group Uranus and Neptune together, so grouping all the generic iceballs together isn't really all that different. And of course, we may discover rings, odd shapes/colors or geological features etc as our knowledge increases.
Sometimes kind of shocking to watch a good RUclips video made by someone that more effectively explains a subject I spent years learning about in school. Like "why did no one else think of explaining it this way before? "
Astro Pro! Gotta say I loved the video! Very well produced and entertainingly educational! (if that even makes sense :) )
This was an extremely enjoyable, informative and fascinating video.
This was so good on Nebula! I hope y’all enjoy!
Dang I gotta watch it there instead. Bye yt!
Why, what's different there?
@@drsrwise watch it earlier
No mention of Ceres gaining the title Dwarf Planet as well. Ceres needs more recognition.
Ceres is cool
Join the Ceres fan club
I like the term planetoid, an object that has some but not all the characteristics of a planet. It’s something that could be used to describe some of the moons in our solar system too. Even our moon has many things in common with Pluto or Eris. But our moon isn’t a planet, so therefore planetoid.
Dude I have some soothing cream for Planetoids...
It Can be very painful in the science department😢
On a serious note you mentioned our moon, which is moving away from us every second, about 4cm a year.
At one epoch no longer will eclipses happen as we see today, but the earths gravitational force will be superceded by another force centrifugal(¿) And be thrown into a different orbit. Maybe stable enough around the sun that it meets all the criteria for the planet. The new name for Luna To Jänus?
What an insanely great video!!! Liked and subscribed!! 😊
Honestly, I'd rather they'd have named it planetoid instead of dwarf planet because from a cursory search that doesn't seem to be an official naming convention yet.
I feel like that wouldn't have caused as much backlash because it is kinda obvious once you compare the other "plutoids" out there that a name similar to asteroids could make sense.
Unfortunately, planetoid is a term long in use. It is another word for asteroid. It's a shame, really, since it is the most logical name to use.
@@perrywilliams5407 Boo at redundant naming, reclaim planetoid for a proper use!
I think all asteroids and all so-called 'dwarf planets' (what a condescending name) should be called 'planetoids'.
@@Rishi123456789 We have also 'dwarf stars' (including 'red dwarfs' and 'white dwarfs') and 'dwarf galaxies'. Why 'dwarf planet' is condescending?
I was initially skeptical if this really was Atlas Pro, or worse if someone was stealing his videos and posting on this channel. Then thankfully I watched until the end and there he was explaining he is also Astro Pro! Let's gooooooo!
Dang bro, now I feel old, you’re fifteen years younger than me and way more eloquent! This was a great video, awesome graphics and animations, very informative and entertaining. Just what I was looking for, and the humor peppered throughout….Hahaha not MY ANUS, YOUR ANUS. lmao, dork. Awesome.
9:09 - why do they have three telescope pointed at the ground 😂
I like the term proto planet. I've slowly been memorising the names of the dwarf planets. I'm intrigued by them. But the moons which are as large or larger than Pluto are curious too. I'm fascinated by all the discoveries in and out of our solar system. Which is why I name my pets after astronomical objects. (4 birds and 3 cats. Psyche, Pandora, Vega, Sojourn, Sola, Lunas, Aster. Eris and Callisto have flown to the bright bird cage in the sky.)
Anyway, space and all its wonders are entrancing to observe and think about. Thanks for the video!
Either its a planet or it is not. e do not care about your pets. OFF Topic.
Proto Planet is a term for ancient remanents, like Vesta and Ceres, Plus planets that probably existed like Theia
You have to be one of my favorite RUclipsrs, and this video shows why. The stories you weave are just so well told. Looking forward to more great Space content like this one! (BTW, congrats on the new house. And your new hair style at the end is fantastic!)
I only remember August 24th, 2006 because it was the day I was born, it's quite interesting to know Pluto became a dwarf planet on the same day. Funnily enough I never knew Pluto had become a "dwarf planet" until I was like 10 or 11, I was very confused at why Pluto suddenly got demoted.
It’s a political battle, not a scientific one.
You remember the day you were born? lol
Spectacular. This is best explanation for the Pluto demotion decision I have seen.
I was not sure from the title if this was going to be solar planets or exo-planets, but having watched the whole video you did an excellent job of explaining why Pluto is no longer classified as a planet. I was surprised that you did not mention the KBO known as Zena and it's moon Gabriel given its size.
Zena/Xena is now named Eris
Xena and Gabrielle are just the old unofficial names for Eris and Dysnomia.
I had forgotten that those two had initially been named after two characters from a television series, until they finally came up with the official names.
Back then as a kid in the early 2000s I was very interested in space and astronomy, and i remember hearing the news that a 10th (Sedna) and 11th (Eris) planet were discovered. I remember Eris was originally called "Xena" back then, and somehow I thought for years that it was officially called Xena until I learned that it was renamed to Eris already soon after its discovery.
I remember the name Xena too. I was also confused for some time when I saw the name Eris.... I actually liked the name Xena for some reason.
@@Rebslager A certain warrior princess perhaps? ;-)
@@lordearthblood Ha ha... Yea I know about her too.... But I also remember Eris was called Xena in the beginning.... and it is kind of a cool name for some reason.... And the warrior princess didn't make the name worse ;-)
Imagine how chaotic the argument is gonna get and how many new categories will need to be created as humanity gets better at finding exoplanets. There's already a chaos of terms like "super earth" "hot Jupiter" and probably tons of stuff I haven't even heard of yet which are occasionally misused.
Hot Jupiters in your neighbourhood
By the IAUs very definition, exp-planets are not planets at all. They run afoul of criteria 1: “…in orbit around *the Sun*.” Meaning our sun, Sol. There are only eight planets in the universe according to the IAU.
Am I being a petty rules-lawyer to reach a conclusion I’d decided on before even beginning. Yes, but no more the IAU did themselves in 2006.
@@matthewtalbot6505 I don’t blame you at all! It’s easy to poke holes in the IAU definition, and people SHOULD do that because the IAU embarrassed themselves with a nonsensical argument.
Really well put together video. Easily good enough for TV imo
Enjoyed the vid, your getting better at this.
So good! Thank you! Can't wait to see what is next for this channel. ❤
I'm looking forward to this video and this channel! My favorite planet is Ceres. #FreeCeres
You are '98 too? Holy crap xD
Damn, that gave me quite a large flashback.
So a problem with the definition in the beginning is - "Um, actually, the planets and asteroids don't revolve around the sun, they revolve around the center of mass of the entire solar system which is situated approximately where the sun wobbles."
My preference would be “major planets” for the eight current planets and “minor planets” for the others.
I don't see any difference between dwarf planet and Minor planet. Its just that you prefer the word minor to dwarf for some reason
My complaint isn't that they made Pluto not in the club, it's that a dwarf PLANET is a planet due to the name and then continued to say "not a planet". I think they should admit they are planets, and call them Planets/Planetoids or Major and Minor Planets. This preserves a simple list of important ones while acknowledging the other significant bodies are similar and relevant without confusing people as much..
I agree! Planetologists call them dwarf planets, but as a TYPE of planet. Like how the sun is a dwarf star, it’s still a star.
What's the difference between dwarf planet and Minor planet? The only difference I see is that you prefer the word minor to dwarf. I don't buy your argument
@@enadegheeghaghe6369 The term “minor planet” was used a long time ago when we thought there were “major planets” (Jupiter, Mars, Neptune, etc.) and “minor planets” (Juno, Vesta, Pallas, etc.). Once we determined that these “minor planets” are less massive and geophysically different than the planets we were familiar with, we realized they weren’t “planets” at all, but asteroids. So the term “minor planet” was dropped, but some people at the Minor Planet Center still continue to use the term for some reason. I caution against using it because it doesn’t make sense to call an asteroid a planet when it’s not. “Asteroid” replaced “minor planet”.
Dwarf planet is a different can of worms. It was a term coined by planetary scientists in the early 90s to mean “small planet”, like how the sun is called a dwarf star to mean “small star”. This term does NOT refer to asteroids, but objects that are actually spherical and planetary like Pluto, Eris, Makamake, Sedna, and more. This term get far more mileage because it actually makes sense. Some people call them “minor planets” because they’re lower mass and gravitationally minuscule compared to the eight “major planets”, but that can get confusing. I’d just stick with terrestrial planets, giant planets, and dwarf planets.
Planets that gravitationally dominate (i.e. over 50% of the mass in their orbital region) should be called cardinal planets.
@Acceleration Quanta That's not how that category works. Titan, Triton, the Galilean satellites, and our moon are not planets.
Ultimately this distinction is just an arbitrary name we use to make sorting and remembering easier, so it can really be whatever. It's like trying to come up with a technical definition to define a pancake as different from a cookie, it doesnt change the nature of them or all the different baked goods between and around them
The pause is one of my favorite parts of the video sooooooo funny
I loved your statements of "Our ability to observe the universe briefly exceeded our own our understanding of the universe." and the ending of "[Science] is about receiving new information and updating your understanding." Too many people think science is proving stuff right, when in fact science is doing something over and over and over to prove itself wrong. Then figuring out what is wrong with it.
It reminds me of all the many aspects of sciences that people act like are 100% concrete at all times. These things though constantly change and adapt like our understanding of Atoms. Even going beyond the Natural Sciences of Physics, Chemistry, and Biology if we look at the Social Sciences things are changing constantly! Sociology, Anthropology, Criminology, Economics, Linguistics, etc. We look at the way that people in the past thought about things and update the terms and ideas to match our increased understandings.
However since Natural sciences are a lot easier to prove because you can just throw math at the arguments... social sciences are happening all around us and affect how we view ourselves and our place in the world. My favorite aspects of the Social Sciences is Philosophy with things like Metaphysics, Social Constructs, and Intersectionality.
Ummm…retired lecturer in Philosophy here. Philosophy isn’t a social science. It isn’t any kind of science, but an exploration of fundamental questions by use of reason. The main divisions are metaphysics (what is the nature of reality) epistemology (how do we know anything) and axiology (study of values - right and wrong, beautiful and ugly, cool and uncool).
Social constructs and intersectionality (awful word!) are concepts from social science. Social science isn’t really science either.
@@robinharwood5044 and pray tell why is intersectionality an awful word?
long time fan of your other channel, here to thank you for another fantastic video. Looking forward to what's next here
“After some debate, a name for this new planet was chosen. Uranus... ... ... 😶. Thrilled with his...”
The pause has me laughing😭.
This is very informative and interesting!
This is such a good video. I watch a lot of space content and nothing is managed, coordinated and explained in such an organised timeline. 5 star video 📹 ✨️
That was really well made! I'm super happy to see that you'll be making strictly space videos over here ☺ all your content is amazing 💜💜
I agree with you, but if dwarf planets are not real planets does it mean that dwarf people are not real people???
@@Reth_Hard exactly
You are the first guy that I have seen who explained this, and now I understand because that clearing the neighborhood thing was confusing. Thank you. Next Question what is in Plutos Neighborhood that hasn't been cleared
the Kuiper belt.
The other Kuiper Belt objects
Everyone: *Trying to think of a good name for a planet*
Nasa: Nah, Oppa12314J is a good name for a planet.
This was really good and very entertaining to watch. There's still so much more to cover, I'll look forward to it.
Atlas Pro made a channel _just_ for astronomy? Instantly subbed. Also, I finally have an excuse to rewatch all the old astronomy videos from the Atlas Pro channel. I'm going to start with the video on Areography since that's one of my all-time favourite videos from the channel. I look forward to all your future videos!
Until your last Atas Pro, I didn't you had a second channel. Now I understand why you happened updated Atlas Pro lately
7:13 I like how he didn't make a single joke about Uranus but instead just paused
The intro scene and channel introducing scene was really awesome 👌
Regarding the term "asteroid": It wasn't because the astronomers thought that they were small stars, it was because they were too small to resolve them in their telescopes as disks, like the planets. They could only see them as dots, like stars, hence star-like.
Very good vid! Keep it up
Great story telling, fantastic video
I am a student astrophysicist at Los Alamos National Labs, and I thought I knew it all!! Turns out there is so much more rich history and politics involved in our astronomical discoveries than I thought. So cool man; I subscribed and hope to see more.
Which one is your favourite “main” planet in the sol system? Mine is either Saturn or Jupiter
OMG I didn't realize you also did a space channel. So awesome, you are one of the best science/geography/non-fiction youtubers on the platform. So cool, I'm going to watch all your videos on this channel now. :D
We had an assembly involving my entire elementary school to explain this.
I can still vividly remember the three scissors cutting Pluto from the rest of the solar system.
I have to correct you on something here. The term 'Dwarf Planet' was used in a few sci-fi 4X games prior to 2006. So yes, the term already existed, it just wasn't in common use and not applied to anything in our star system.
Indeed, it was coined by Dr. Alan Stern in 1991.
THANK YOU! At last it all makes sense. SO well explained without being over-extended and/or boring.
It's interesting to see this perspective, because I was just about to graduate high school when the announcement came out, and we took several weeks off from other material in my physics class to talk about the whole thing and calculate out some related things using what we'd been learning in physics (def very basic stuff, but as a teacher you gotta take what real life application moments you get!). So like, was probably the ideal age to just be fully informed about the decision, since adults not in the field could easily avoid looking up the context, and kids of a younger age probably weren't ready to get into the stuff about it all in their science classes.
But also, our entire way of classifying objects in our solar system probably should be adjusted. Maybe talk about our "ten orbital ranges" to kids, one named for each of our eight planets and one for the astroid belt and one for the kuiper belt, since those groupings are still easily teachable without trying to group disparate objects weirdly. Each orbital range is rather unique, and that would give a good stepping stone to talk about all the smaller, less charismatic orbital bodies in the ranges of the inner planets too!
i think the mathematical equation would have been the best way to convince people, when you see that zero across all plutoids then it becomes clear how small they are in comparison to the rest
Cool video, in a game i play, it includes Ceres, Eris, and Sedna as locations in solar system, so I'm pretty familiar with those ones already and would have no problem considering them planets as well along with Pluto.
Good, because they ARE planets.
Every single video of yours manages to blow me away. Your attention to detail and dedication to your work is spectacular. Keep up the good work. You're by far my favorite content creator on RUclips.
That was an excellent video. It was well made and explained the history and reasoning behind the decision really well. My kids and I really enjoyed it.
Great videos. Please come back!
Another great video. You earn another subscriber