this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
334 points (99.1% liked)
xkcd
9931 readers
211 users here now
A community for a webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I honestly don't know. I tend to say no, as it seems to just be a lifeless rock with no geological activity. I'd love to have rules to identify that, made by planetary geologists.
But I wouldn't want to disqualify a body with planetary characteristics like geological activity just because the space around it is busy, or it's orbit is not in the ecliptic plain, etc.
~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~
Ceres does appear to be active in some form with cryovolcanoes, based on the 2015 Dawn mission.
I think focus ought to be more on what the qualifications are for the minor label. What does it mean to be minor?
Then It's say that it was a planet, though IANAPG.
There shouldn't be a 'minor' nomenclature, it's a contrivance. It's a planet, or not
Also, to reiterate, the issue being discussed is one of disqualification, and not what qualifies. Identifying a body as a planet or not should not be done based on the criteria of the crowded or not nature of the space around it.
~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~