• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Our solar system just got more crowded - 3 new moons discovered

Roadvirus

Roadvirus

Heading North
Dungeon Master
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 19, 2014
Messages
42,346
Reaction score
31,613
Location
Tennessee, USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
2 orbiting Neptune and the other around Uranus (Yeah...there's no way to avoid "the joke" here. Sorry ;)).

Astronomers have discovered two tiny moons orbiting Neptune and one circling Uranus, bringing the number of their known moons to 16 and 28 respectively.

Uranus' new moon, the first detected around the ice giant in over two decades and possibly the smallest of its ilk, is just 5 miles (8 kilometers) wide; it takes 680 days to complete one orbit around Uranus. In comparison, one Mars' moons named Deimos, considered to be among the tiniest known moons in our solar system, is 8 miles (13 km) wide.

-skip-

The brighter of Neptune's two new moons is provisionally named "S/2002 N5." At 14 miles (23 km) wide, this newly discovered satellite seems to be in a 9-year orbit around Neptune. The fainter moon, currently assigned the name "S/2021 N1," is 8.6 miles wide (14 km) and circles Neptune once every 27 years. Both Neptunian moons will be assigned permanent names based on sea gods and nymphs in Greek mythology.

www.space.com

3 tiny new moons found around Uranus and Neptune — and one is exceptionally tiny

Two will be named after sea gods and nymphs and the other will be named for a Shakespearean character.
www.space.com www.space.com
Click to expand...
 
They are called hemorrhoids.
 
They were always there, so the solar system didn't get crowded.

Uranus' moons are named after Shakespearean characters, should be fun to name them.
 
The universe is flat.
 
HIP56948 said:
View attachment 67494701
Click to expand...
Pluto is not going anywhere. The only thing that changed was our definition, and that is far too clumsy to last very long.

Any object that orbits the Barry-center of its primary star(s) and has achieved hydrostatic equilibrium, and is not fusing deuterium, should be considered a "planet." That would include objects as small as the dwarf planet Ceres, to something as large as the size of ~13 Jupiter masses. At around 14 Jupiter masses the object begins fusing deuterium, making it a Brown Dwarf. Brown Dwarfs range from 14 Jupiter masses to around 80 Jupiter masses. At ~80 Jupiter masses the object begins fusing hydrogen and becomes a star.

That would put "planets" anywhere in the range from as small as 0.0000005 Jupiter masses to as large as ~13 Jupiter masses.

Whether an object "cleared the neighbourhood" around its orbit is immaterial to its definition as a "planet." None of the planets in our solar system have cleared their orbits, which means - according to the IAU - that none should be planets. Particularly Jupiter which has both the Greek and Trojan asteroids preceding and following Jupiter's orbit. Even Earth has asteroids in both Lagrange L4 and L5, and what about the moon? How can Earth be considered a planet under the IAU's definition when it has not "cleared the neighbourhood" around its orbit?

To distinguish an asteroid or comet from a planet, and to distinguish the difference between a planet and a brown dwarf, it should have the following definition:
  1. The object's primary orbit is around the Barry-center of its star(s);
  2. The object must be large enough to obtain hydrostatic equilibrium; and
  3. The object must not be fusing deuterium.
Under the above definition moons would not be considered "planets" because their primary orbit is around another object and they only indirectly orbit the Barry-center of its star(s).

Another reason why this moronic IAU's definition will not last is because they failed to include exoplanets. No exoplanet ever discovered is considered a "planet" under the IAU definition since none orbit our Sun. Even though they created this definition in 2006, a decade after we had discovered the first exoplanet. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
slavablueberryjam said:
Makes you wonder if the standards for defining a moon are too lax.
Click to expand...
If it is orbiting another object, and not the Barry-center of its star(s) directly, then it must be a "moon." Asteroids can have moons, just like planets and brown dwarfs can have moons. Moons that orbit other moons are called "sub-satellites."
 
Roadvirus said:
2 orbiting Neptune and the other around Uranus (Yeah...there's no way to avoid "the joke" here. Sorry ;)).
Click to expand...
Those aren't moons. They're solar dingleberries.
 
beefheart said:
They were always there, so the solar system didn't get crowded.

Uranus' moons are named after Shakespearean characters, should be fun to name them.
Click to expand...
I kind of like the name hemorrhoid for the one around Uranus.
 
Roadvirus said:
2 orbiting Neptune and the other around Uranus (Yeah...there's no way to avoid "the joke" here. Sorry ;)).
Click to expand...
Those moons have always been there... we are no more crowded than we were....
 
HIP56948 said:
I get to see it, if the sky is fairly dark. My scope 14" has a hard time resolving it. (It's close to the line-up planets just before dawn) :)
PS. Haven't seen you in a few weeks. Not asking anything...just Audrey Hepburn sticks out. :)
Click to expand...
Just didn't feel like posting and 5 weeks flew by... LOL.

That is cool. To even be able to get close to seeing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom