How Many Planets There ACTUALLY Are

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-...

[@cyan3714]

The three second pause after introducing Uranus is the equivalent of a laugh track

[@NGSForsaken]

Good to know I'm not the only one who perceived it like that :D

[@sladval]

The 12 year old in me laughed

[@mannyhood9736]

*soft piano notes*

[@desertsoldier41]

Needed a cricket noise.

[@joshgreen2164]

Agreed but far more effective.

[@joe-cg2hv]

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.

[@RideAcrossTheRiver]

Actually, we are looking at nature's boxes and simply labelling them.

[@user-zb8tq5pr4x]

@@RideAcrossTheRiver No, nature doesn't have boxes. Nature doesn't care. OP was correct, we create our own boxes.

[@gljames24]

@@RideAcrossTheRiver No, we try to simplify reality to reduce complexity, but nature is just inherently complex. That's why semantics will always be debated.

[@RideAcrossTheRiver]

@@gljames24 We observe a loose association of body types in our solar system. Same for stars and galaxies.

[@fisharmor]

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.

[@RamblinPhoenix]

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)

[@frankshailes3205]

Of course, asteroids have for the longest time been classified as "minor planets".

[@briangrigsby1842]

must have been a 4 inch refractor....price really jumps up from going from 3.3 inch to a 4inch.

[@ngc-fo5te]

I believe it has been seen by the naked eye by people with extremely good night vision at high elevation dark sky sites.

[@accelerationquanta5816]

Ceres is a planet. It's a natural object massive enough to reach hydrostatic equilibrium; planet.

[@ngc-fo5te]

@@accelerationquanta5816 No it isn't. It fails one category.

[@sanidhyagoswami8256]

My heart is with the man at 0:39, holding up the poster that said "Size doesn't matter"

[@guillermohernandez9334]

Same

[@ncopas]

4 of them had that poster actually. edit: nevermind, i might have found 6 of them.

[@matthewwheatley6361]

Calling them Plutoids instead of Icesteroids is one of the biggest misses in astronomical history.

[@astropro1]

Damn I wish I'd thought of Icesteroids 😂

[@noytelinu3409]

@@astropro1 it was an appeal to the emotional pluto lovers who won't shut up after 16 years

[@christophermire3872]

Plutoid is a nice homage to dear old Pluto but we really need something more scientific.

[@matthewwheatley6361]

@@astropro1 In fairness, cryasteroids sounds way more scientific

[@mfaizsyahmi]

I cryo'd 🥶😭

[@Arranus]

Haumea is the most criminally underrated object in the entire solar system

[@mayzdev]

yup

[@Ligerbee]

yea

[@soaringstars314]

It's not a crime it's a felony

[@tartine2463]

The great egg in the sky needs its voice heard

[@thedenskan3440]

@@tartine2463 You made me spit out my water, but I'm not angry.

[@OzymandiasWasRight]

The fact it has a giant heart on it just hurts. Such a loveable little guy.

[@nicholas3354]

"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.

[@Kalleosini]

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

[@HateItHere.]

Neptune and Uranus are considered ice giants so wouldn't it be 3?

[@BrettonFerguson]

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.

[@WinVisten]

@@BrettonFerguson BURN! American school system be like:

[@BrettonFerguson]

@@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".

[@Eulers_Identity]

The human ability to argue about massive rocks floating in space half a light-year away is frankly astonishing.

[@davidk1308]

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.

[@RideAcrossTheRiver]

Kuiper Belt is not rocky bodies. They are icy bodies.

[@LostLargeCats]

@@RideAcrossTheRiver also these are way closer than half a light year. It's less than a thousandth of a lightyear.

[@starcrafsf7101]

Pluto is like half a light day away if not closer.

[@OmikronTitan]

Pluto, apparently not even in the solar system.

[@adamirshaid7637]

Dude, I really have to say that you're an exceptional KZbinr. 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.

[@halonothing1]

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.

[@el-verdadero_mordecai-456]

Imagine having to model each asteroid they found💀

[@halonothing1]

@@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.

[@jesusramirezromo2037]

​@@halonothing1 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

[@whannabi]

Just go look at Space Engine. It's not perfect but good enough.

[@Carlos-bq8tk]

The I.A.U hurt Pluto's feelings and laugh at Pluto and calling Pluto names right?

[@BierBart12]

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

[@rakhatthenut3815]

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.

[@BierBart12]

​​@@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

[@edgaraldana3205]

Wait, Ceres has 33% of the mass on the asteroid belt? That's amazing.

[@TechRyze]

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.

[@TlalocTemporal]

@@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.

[@eannamcnamara9338]

Exactly why it's cool. It's such a massive object in the belt. It would be cool if more people knew about it.

[@RideAcrossTheRiver]

@@TechRyze What is there to mine? And what use even were it found?

[@RideAcrossTheRiver]

@@eannamcnamara9338 1 Ceres is only 11 percent the mass of the Moon.

[@daniharling3632]

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.

[@jasonreed7522]

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)

[@guestive]

we're never mature when it comes to uranus (audience laugh)

[@billwilson1079]

The silent pause after saying uranus was just too funny, but it be interesting to find out why they decided to name it that.

[@sulaimanahmad9972]

10:51 "Not my anus Uranus" 💀

[@DJWhylafihya]

@@guestiveuranus isn't a laughing matter ... uranus is huge full of gas and very important!

[@olGrandpaby]

This is easily the best explanation I’ve ever heard about this subject. Good work.

[@laniakea31]

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.

[@XBrain130]

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 👍

[@astropro1]

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.

[@XBrain130]

@@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 🤔

[@christophermire3872]

Damn. I was totally theorizing that Neptune's orbit was being deformed by the wormhole left out there by previous visitors.

[@elle9834]

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.

[@XBrain130]

@@elle9834 That was Mercury

[@petersmythe6462]

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.

[@emmano6340]

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.

[@PyroBlaze202_alt]

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.

[@jeffdeischer8692]

@@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.

[@PyroBlaze202_alt]

@@jeffdeischer8692, none have been discovered. But, as far as I understand, one could be discovered. which is what I'm referencing in my comment.

[@Jellyman1129]

@@PyroBlaze202_alt I wouldn’t doubt it. The IAU botched the definition to begin with, it’ll be obsolete in no time.

[@bbbl67]

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.

[@carlossaraiva8213]

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?

[@Dulcimerist]

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.

[@carlossaraiva8213]

@@Dulcimerist And people who loved astronomy acted more dignified and as adults back in the day.

[@Dulcimerist]

@@carlossaraiva8213 Great point!

[@AstroChara]

​@@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.

[@snintendog]

@@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.

[@C_B_Hubbs]

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.

[@Jellyman1129]

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.

[@accelerationquanta5816]

"Dwarf planets" are literally just planets. They have no actual distinction from planets whatsoever. Moons are also planets.

[@racontoor]

Learn to edit. C+

[@atomicplanets8226]

Hey, why not present/communicate/ or educate at the planetarium the possibility that Mercury is Venus' moon.

[@komrade_eliriz]

​@@atomicplanets8226Mercury does not orbit Venus??? What the hell are you on?

[@ScionStorm1]

*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.

[@Jellyman1129]

*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. 🙄

[@NikodAnimations]

​​@Jellyman1129 Kids don't learn all 1000

[@imsonicnoob2112]

Meanwhile the periodic table:

[@jwyanni]

So, 20+ planets is just too hard to teach, and there are how many Pokémon now? I think the kids can handle it.

[@ankaplanka]

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!

[@mrgcav]

There are 9 planets in our solar system and 4 known planetoids.

[@AyushmaanMishra]

Alright then learn all asteroids and TNOs [insert gru holding you on gunpoint here]

[@accelerationquanta5816]

Pluto is a planet. Pluto's "demotion" is complete bullshit.

[@Jellyman1129]

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.

[@ulfrinn8783]

It's okay to disagree with the IAU's arbitrary third criteria.

[@PhoenyxV]

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.

[@astropro1]

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!

[@PhoenyxV]

@@astropro1 It was back in 2007 or 2008 but I remember it being really interesting. Great work from you on this video as well!

[@alexreustle]

@@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!

[@allanolley4874]

@@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.

[@clarenceartman7487]

That's a hilarious title for a lecture

[@DrewFeille]

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.

[@Jellyman1129]

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.

[@handledav]

g!kúnǁ'hòmdímà

[@kcglearningeverythingthati2599]

@@handledav What you said is a dwarf planet candidate, 2007 UK126

[@accelerationquanta5816]

"Which really highlights the main reason why Pluto had to be excluded" There is literally no reason to exclude Pluto. The solar system has literally hundreds of planets. "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." All of them are planets.

[@Jellyman1129]

@@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.

[@G35Jeff]

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.

[@hyoslvrscott]

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. 👨‍🎓

[@HighPeakMapping]

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!

[@buckmurdock2025]

The question here is; when does a hill become a mountain.

[@BerryTheBnnuy]

Can I interest you in the term "centaur"?

[@marhawkman303]

@@BerryTheBnnuy isn't that only for things influenced by Jupiter's orbit?

[@HipsterShiningArmor]

So basically just "all the dwarf planets except Makemake"

[@the_dark_one6052]

*separate

[@yinyangphoenix]

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.)

[@jasonreed7522]

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)

[@RuthBingham]

Geoid already has a meaning, so I thought terroid might be better... however, a quick Google search found that to be taken as well.

[@Mahlak_Mriuani_Anatman]

@@RuthBingham words can have many meaning associated to it

[@MajinRixch]

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

[@chettlar212]

​@@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.

[@cwstreeper]

This was a very well done and thoughtfully researched video. Bravo!

[@faramund9865]

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.

[@4orks976]

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.

[@jtteope1178]

im glad theyre trying to find a new planet, lets just hope it actually exists

[@SoftBreadSoft]

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

[@4orks976]

@@SoftBreadSoft 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.

[@SoftBreadSoft]

@@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.

[@4orks976]

@@SoftBreadSoft 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

[@ionryful]

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!

[@janjamesramos247]

Same feeling when Eris was found out. I thought it will be the tenth planet. 😔

[@joshuahutchings558]

I was in 5th grade when it was discovered and I remember saying to my friends that Sedna sounded like an insurance company.

[@WorthlessDeadEnd]

This was really well done. What a presentation. Bravo!

[@alexandercolefield9523]

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.

[@ZakhadWOW]

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.

[@AZ-697]

No mention of Ceres gaining the title Dwarf Planet as well. Ceres needs more recognition.

[@user-zj9cp2yg9h]

Ceres is cool Join the Ceres fan club

[@anthonygonzales580]

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! 🌌

[@DarthWells]

dude, that pause after announcing William Herschel's discovery....just long enough that I had to chuckle

[@Writer_Productions_Map]

=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".

[@watsonwrote]

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

[@MigWith]

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.

[@geckoo7770]

Same here

[@jasonreed7522]

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.

[@Jellyman1129]

Don’t know why’d you immediately accept something without doing your own research. Seems gullible.

[@tomfeng5645]

@@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!

[@theobserver9066]

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!

[@stevenklimecky4918]

This is the best and best-explained basic presentation on this and similar topics (such as transneptunian objects) I have ever seen.

[@vinnystackhouse7161]

This was an extremely enjoyable, informative and fascinating video.

[@kaeloates4887]

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.

[@Jellyman1129]

It’s a political battle, not a scientific one.

[@Ramble1234]

You remember the day you were born? lol

[@firenter]

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.

[@perrywilliams5407]

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.

[@firenter]

@@perrywilliams5407 Boo at redundant naming, reclaim planetoid for a proper use!

[@Rishi123456789]

I think all asteroids and all so-called 'dwarf planets' (what a condescending name) should be called 'planetoids'.

[@juanausensi499]

@@Rishi123456789 We have also 'dwarf stars' (including 'red dwarfs' and 'white dwarfs') and 'dwarf galaxies'. Why 'dwarf planet' is condescending?

[@skengo9817]

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

[@NotSoNormal1987]

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!

[@mrgcav]

Either its a planet or it is not. e do not care about your pets. OFF Topic.

[@jesusramirezromo2037]

Proto Planet is a term for ancient remanents, like Vesta and Ceres, Plus planets that probably existed like Theia

[@robertjarman3703]

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.

[@LET-THE-G00D-TIMES-R0LL]

Earth-Moon is a binary system, the center of gravity of the system makes it difficult to visualize.

[@RideAcrossTheRiver]

The Moon would be called a planet if it orbited the Sun by itself.

[@LET-THE-G00D-TIMES-R0LL]

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.

[@Zeder95]

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.

[@Rebslager]

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.

[@lordearthblood]

@@Rebslager A certain warrior princess perhaps? ;-)

[@Rebslager]

@@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 ;-)

[@jetboy531]

This is very informative and interesting!

[@patrickmoran687]

Spectacular. This is best explanation for the Pluto demotion decision I have seen.

[@Jack-496]

This was so good on Nebula! I hope y’all enjoy!

[@Ledabot]

Dang I gotta watch it there instead. Bye yt!

[@drsrwise]

Why, what's different there?

[@Arranus]

@@drsrwise watch it earlier

[@StuffandThings_]

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.

[@williamchamberlain2263]

Hot Jupiters in your neighbourhood

[@matthewtalbot6505]

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.

[@Jellyman1129]

@@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.

[@joeyspears2759]

Enjoyed the vid, your getting better at this.

[@Allegheny500]

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.

[@ian.r5261]

Zena/Xena is now named Eris

[@servantofaeie1569]

Xena and Gabrielle are just the old unofficial names for Eris and Dysnomia.

[@Dulcimerist]

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.

[@vinayaksridhar1699]

The intro scene and channel introducing scene was really awesome 👌

[@golferorb]

I'm looking forward to this video and this channel! My favorite planet is Ceres. #FreeCeres

[@bigassasin21]

Astro Pro! Gotta say I loved the video! Very well produced and entertainingly educational! (if that even makes sense :) )

[@iamtheoysterking]

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.

[@daemonwick718]

Dude I have some soothing cream for Planetoids... It Can be very painful in the science department😢

[@daemonwick718]

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?

[@motleythewild]

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.

[@accelerationquanta5816]

Moons are planets. Pluto is a planet.

[@VectorJW9260]

​@@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.

[@oatlord]

Sometimes kind of shocking to watch a good KZbin 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? "

[@lanalaniakea]

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!!

[@ians6323]

Really well put together video. Easily good enough for TV imo

[@daniellefores4491]

Great story telling, fantastic video

[@DarkTim3z]

Didn’t realize this channel existed until about 20 minutes ago, I’m so happy it does

[@beatriceroosmark9796]

Same! Now time to watch every video 💪

[@kid14346]

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.

[@robinharwood5044]

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.

[@kid14346]

@@robinharwood5044 and pray tell why is intersectionality an awful word?

[@bicivelo]

What an insanely great video!!! Liked and subscribed!! 😊

[@docthompson1]

Another great video. You earn another subscriber

[@sapanparekh3327]

You have to be one of my favorite KZbinrs, 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!)

[@arywangsaadhiraka1131]

as expected from you... AMAZING QUALITY I LOVE IT!!!

[@astropro1]

Nothing but the best for you 😉

[@LampjarJackpot]

Everyone: *Trying to think of a good name for a planet* Nasa: Nah, Oppa12314J is a good name for a planet.

[@Yuki_Ika7]

I love how you left a pause after the Uranus reveal, and it worked lol

[@stirnisbriedis9859]

So good! Thank you! Can't wait to see what is next for this channel. ❤

[@scionofpluto3420]

I wish you talked about Pluto's active geology which has sustained itself for billions of years through mostly its own radioactive decay in its rocks like Earth, rather than through tidal forces such as the Galilean moons. Pluto is just as planet-like as Mercury, Venus, and Mars. A lonely cryovolcano has been discovered on Ceres, indicating that this king of the asteroid belt is right on the line between a geologically active body orbiting the sun (a planet), and one which isn't. Triton is especially interesting, because it's the only large moon in our solar system which geologically makes sense to be a captured planet, and the only large moon with a retrograde orbit. Geologically, out of any body in the system currently known, Triton has the best case for being the tenth planet with anything less planet-like than Triton orbiting the sun but still being spherical, a dwarf planet, but has essentially been entrapped by Neptune, rendering only nine planets :)

[@gigadude]

#MakePlutoGreatAgain

[@scionofpluto3420]

@@gigadude Dangerously based.

[@Jellyman1129]

Couldn’t agree more! This is largely in line with the geophysical planet definition, which is superior.

[@ajhproductions2347]

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 😂

[@1manApocalypse_CP]

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.

[@Jellyman1129]

Good, because they ARE planets.

[@GeoStreber]

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.

[@ordinarylivv]

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 💜💜

[@Reth_Hard]

I agree with you, but if dwarf planets are not real planets does it mean that dwarf people are not real people???

[@nuttynoah5342]

@@Reth_Hard exactly

[@sonnywoods6846]

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

[@gantick]

the Kuiper belt.

[@StephanFitzgeraldTay]

The other Kuiper Belt objects

[@nimbusshadow-wings]

People should be happy for Pluto, it went from runt of the litter to king of the dwarves.

[@Althexia]

This was really good and very entertaining to watch. There's still so much more to cover, I'll look forward to it.

[@katherinegilks3880]

My preference would be “major planets” for the eight current planets and “minor planets” for the others.

[@enadegheeghaghe6369]

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

[@jupiterbooba]

Great videos. Please come back!

[@pboytrif1]

Pluto... you lost your status... but you won our hearts. Great viideo

[@flyingeagle3898]

long time fan of your other channel, here to thank you for another fantastic video. Looking forward to what's next here

[@thebeeemill]

I know you briefly touched on it but the notion of Planet X still existing fascinates me. I’m not really sure what else there is to say on the topic but a video on where/what Planet X might be like would be cool.

[@pocketmarcy6990]

It might exist or it might not, some people think it’s the solar system’s missing “super-Earth” others say it could be a completely transparent gas giant

[@jesusramirezromo2037]

It just doesn't exist, What they where looking for was found out to be failed math, they expected a near Jupiter mass object to explain the anomaly, but the discovery of general relativity fixed the math Planet 9 is a completely different theory than the Planet X theory, and theoretically it could be possible, as the math for it only puts it at around 3-4 Earth masses, but even then, it's also likely based on incorrect math

[@chrisrodgers855]

You got it 👍 Can’t wait for your next video

[@nip3004]

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.

[@fanamatakecick97]

I consider dwarf planets to be planets, however, i feel like a lot of objects that somehow manage hydrostatic equilibrium with low mass should be considered planetoids. In all, Makemake is barely dwarf planet Also, speaking of dwarf planets, it’s been argued that Charon is actually a dwarf planet as well, and it and Pluto are a dual-planetary system, which does have merit. Technically, Pluto doesn’t orbit around the sun, it orbits around a point just above its atmosphere, which Charon also orbits, and said point is what orbits the sun. Lastly, the two bodies are tidally locked to each other, and all 4 other moons orbit both of them

[@praveenvijeyakumar741]

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!

[@joedain7320]

It's arguable if other planets even clear their orbits. Jupiter as a set of asteroids that orbit generally ahead and behind

[@nactox]

Very good vid! Keep it up

[@dmr8914]

THANK YOU! At last it all makes sense. SO well explained without being over-extended and/or boring.

[@saice5503]

of course i'm fine with accepting all the others along with pluto! i think what we need is to accept them all into the planet category, then break the category up further into rocky, terrestrial (has more than one phase of matter on its surface, such as earth, venus, and io), gas giants, and ice giants. In addition, I think it might be good to change the naming conventions for moons and planets to something like primary, secondary and tertiary objects

[@Jellyman1129]

I couldn’t agree more! That’s already a thing with the geophysical planet definition. There’s terrestrial planets (like Earth), giant planets (like Jupiter), dwarf planets [which ARE planets] (like Pluto), and satellite planets (like Titan).

[@ryzethick1071]

@@Jellyman1129 I agree with your idea for satellite planets I always thought the larger moons of the solar system deserved a better name than just moon while I personally think planetary moon is a better choice As I feel there needs to be an easy way to differentiate moons from each other

[@Jellyman1129]

@@ryzethick1071 I certainly appreciate your reply, but it’s not MY idea. It’s the concept of the experts in the field, I’m just following along with their planet definition. And round moons go by a handful of names: satellite planet, secondary planet, and yes, planetary moon. You’re absolutely right. All of these names are used interchangeably and all mean the same thing, so pick whatever works for you! “Planetary moon” definitely sound the best to say, so feel free to use it! Planets that orbit a star are often called solar planets or primary planets. And planets without a host system are rogue planets or free-floating planets. Other moons like Phobos or Dactyl are often called satellite asteroids or asteroidal moons. “Asteroidal moons” sounds way better in my opinion. It makes sense that moons are divided into asteroidal or planetary because it doesn’t make sense, for example, to group Titan with Hyperion as the same object. Sure, they’re both moons/satellites because they orbit the same thing, but you can tell they’re clearly very different objects. Thanks for the comment! 😁

[@coolcathay7959]

Until your last Atas Pro, I didn't you had a second channel. Now I understand why you happened updated Atlas Pro lately

[@jek__]

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

[@Nakande72]

I think planet should be a large category for all bodies in hydrostatic equilibrium that are not stars (including the large moons). If you want a short list for the kids, you can still call the terrestrial planets, gas giants, and ice giants the 8 major planets.

[@Jellyman1129]

I couldn’t agree more! I use the geophysical planet definition as it’s far less ambiguous. Instead of kids learning the names of every single planet, just have them learn the types. There’s terrestrial planets (like Earth), giant planets (like Jupiter), dwarf planets (like Pluto) and satellite planets (like Titan).

[@janjamesramos247]

Yes agree. the Sun is very small compared to other stars so might as well remove sun in the star category because of its size 😒

[@Jellyman1129]

@@janjamesramos247 Exactly. The sun is a dwarf star, but it’s still a star. Same with the dwarf planets. They’re planets that are just smaller.

[@janjamesramos247]

@@Jellyman1129 @Jellyman Thank you. Oh, I didn't know that the sun is a dwarf star. I just disagree with the notion that Pluto is not anymore a planet. Its characteristics are like a planet except that it's small. But some satellites are also too small but there's no dwarf satellite category 😅 Anyway, I agree to your categories and it can be truly considered.

[@Jellyman1129]

@@janjamesramos247 Yeah, the sun is a yellow dwarf. And Pluto has all the characteristics of planet-hood. Some moons are even bigger than Mercury.

[@taimurmasood5222]

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 KZbin.

[@kryzethx]

Huh, I never knew about the new classification of "plutoid"; I think that makes a lot of sense. If we had to start changing names like asteroids due to not matching what they are, then we'd also lose out on the word "nova" (new star), which means we'd also lose out on supernova and hypernova, etc. and I would prefer to keep those cool sounding names. Plutoid also rolls off the tongue better than dwarf planet or proto-planet; less syllables lol

[@williamrogers4917]

The problem was it was never made clear to many why the downgraded Pluto. We had the term gas giant for the large planets that had more atmosphere than the others in the system. They could have kept Pluto a planet but just give in a classification for all the other Pluto like planets. As for classes, you could have led in that Pluto was one of many without having to go through all their names. I really don't have a problem welcoming the others, but for grade school, you would not need to go that detail. Just like we do not go into detail over every name for ever object in space. I know I did not learn about the many types of sun till I got much older.