Recommended Posts

Yeah! Great news.

I had already taught my 5 year old that it wasn't a real planet anyway.

[Thread Moved from GD to SS]

heh, the end to our solar system is now uranus.

No, that would be Neptune. Although I can see how the other would be fitting.

We now have four rock/mantle planets (Earth being the largest) and four gas giants (Jupiter being the largest) and zero ice balls.

Why do they do this? Why re-write we have learned to be conventional thinking? Whot benefit is there to saying "Oh, this is no longer a planet"?

It deals with the process of understanding what nature is telling us, science builds on doubt. If science didn't doubt itself then we wouldn't be as intelligent of a species as we are, we'd still be riding horsedrawn buggies and telling mythological tales......oh wait.

what about that new planet they found (and recently named i think) beyound pluto?

Even one of the guys who found it doesn't think it should be considered a planet. If Pluto has been declassified then you can bet that our solar system has 8 planets and that will now never change.

Pluto and XB313 (aka Xena) will be called Plutons or Planetoids or something to that effect.

http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/ (from my sig)

We knew 9 planets was wrong. The only question was should be go with 8 or 10+?

I could say the same thing about Earth being flat, but luckily it was proved to be a sphere.

Not really the same. Flat and round are definite descriptions.

We classified it as a "Planet" and now it is a "Pluton" - explain how re-classifying it is the same...

Not really the same. Flat and round are definite descriptions.

We classified it as a "Planet" and now it is a "Pluton" - explain how re-classifying it is the same...

It has been given a different (and more accurate) description. The American who discovered it said that it was the size of earth which it clearly isn't. It is actually considerably smaller than our moon.

Wikipedia is quick:

Pluto was until recently considered the ninth and smallest of the traditional planets of the Solar system, but on August 24, 2006 it was 'demoted' and stripped of its planetary status by the International Astronomical Union at their Prague meeting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto

Why do they do this? Why re-write we have learned to be conventional thinking? Whot benefit is there to saying "Oh, this is no longer a planet"?

Who said it should benefit anyone? what the hell are you saying? They came up for a definition of what a planet really is, and pluto doesn't fit this new description. Anyway, pluto's status was already a raging debate between astronomist. The majority of them now say it is an ejected mass from the Kuiper belt. Also, if it would've been accepted as a planet, then they would've had to include Xena, Sedna and Quaoar as planet also? They are other roaming ejected Kuiper belt object that revolves around the sun just like pluto.

The ONLY reason why it took so long to get pluto out of the selected few is because it's the only supposed "planet" that as been discovered by the Americans.. BWEEE, biiiig deal. Get over with it.

Now, they need to make the same things for moons... Jupiter now have a count of about 60 moons... lol!!! bull****. Most of them are asteroid who don't even have a mass big enough to be spherical that revolves around the planet. They are ASTEROIDS damn it. Call them orbiting asteroids I don't care, but please... I don't want to teach my kids the 60 moons of jupiters :p

I could say the same thing about Earth being flat, but luckily it was proved to be a sphere.

thank you, good example

heh, the end to our solar system is now uranus.

hmmm... Am I the first one to notice this comment or it's a joke or something?

hikkk..hehe

jupiter...... uranus..... NEPTUNE....! wake up!!

thank you, good example

hmmm... Am I the first one to notice this comment or it's a joke or something?

hikkk..hehe

jupiter...... uranus..... NEPTUNE....! wake up!!

Well, actually, the order is jupiter, SATURN, uranus, neptune. :shiftyninja:

So really, the phrase "planet" was without a coherrant definition, and even so we were technically wrong to have ever called it a planet?

This new schema just reinforces that?

If that's the case then fair enough I guess. At least there is a reason for it. I just hate re-learning things when nothing has changed.

Sounds like a good idea, makes much more sense to have 8 planets rather than 50+ :yes:

I always like Pluto, probably because it was discovered on my birthday (albeit 51 years before I was born lol).

I remember learning the order of the planets as a child, and saying them over and over to get them to stick in my head.

"Mercury - Venus - Earth - Mars - Jupiter - Saturn - Uranus - Neptune - Pluto".

Saying it now without Pluto at the end feels as though there is something missing (well there is), but its the sound of it that sentance that feels funny now too. I hope you lot know what I'm saying :p

Sounds like a good idea, makes much more sense to have 8 planets rather than 50+ :yes:

I always like Pluto, probably because it was discovered on my birthday (albeit 51 years before I was born lol).

I remember learning the order of the planets as a child, and saying them over and over to get them to stick in my head.

"Mercury - Venus - Earth - Mars - Jupiter - Saturn - Uranus - Neptune - Pluto".

Saying it now without Pluto at the end feels as though there is something missing (well there is), but its the sound of it that sentance that feels funny now too. I hope you lot know what I'm saying :p

It will sound better than:

"Mercury - Venus - Earth - Mars - Ceres -Jupiter - Saturn - Uranus - Neptune - Pluto - Charon - Xena".

Not to mention 40+ more that would likely have needed to be added over the next few decades.

It will sound better than:

"Mercury - Venus - Earth - Mars - Ceres -Jupiter - Saturn - Uranus - Neptune - Pluto - Charon - Xena".

Not to mention 40+ more that would likely have needed to be added over the next few decades.

Don't forget Gabriel, can't have Xena without her. :D

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I like the show more options. The only problem with it is that it's not always in a consistent spot in the menu. If the copy/paste/cut, happens to show on top, then more option is the last in the menu. But if copy/paste/cut happens to show on the bottom, then more options is before the copy/paste/cut. But I do like the more options because it hides the stuff that I rarely use. But I would like to choose what it is or isn't hiding. That would make it better.
    • I wonder if "put it back the way it was for decades" ever crossed their minds? 🤣
    • Rescind the stupid "Show more options" in context menus and just give us the full menu instead of adding more steps to get to what we want. The "simpler by default" makes me think they'll go in the opposite direction. Every context menu should have a configure button so you can pick and choose what options should be shown, I know you can do that with some registry fu but that shouldn't be required.
    • This is why competition must exist. Finally, pressure is mounting on Microsoft to move in the right direction.
    • Microsoft is making Windows 11's context menus faster, simpler, and configurable by Taras Buria Five years ago, Windows 11 introduced redesigned context menus, offering users a simpler, more modern design. However, customers quickly discovered that the new menus leave a lot to be desired. Many are unhappy with performance (they are really slow), while others dislike the double-layed design, where many options are hidden behind the "Show more options" button. In addition, over the years, menus became cluttered and overloaded. While Microsoft has already fixed plenty of pain points across Windows 11, context menus remain mostly unchanged. Fortunately, Microsoft is finally listening. Marcus Ash, Design and Research Lead for Windows at Microsoft, responded to a tweet on X, confirming that the company is working on fixing Windows 11's context menus. Reworked context menus are supposed to be faster, simpler by default, and "configurable to what you use most." What the latter means is unknown, just like whether Microsoft plans to keep the classic menu alongside the modern one, but according to Marcus, the wait should finally be over soon, as he promised to "share our approach soon." Improved context menus will most likely appear first in Windows 11 preview builds in the Experimental Channel. While we wait for Microsoft to release them, you can try fixing context menus on your PC with a simple tool called Windows 11 Context Menu Manager. It lets you disable entries you do not need, not only cleaning up context menus, but also making them significantly faster. Microsoft has already improved Windows 11's Start menu and taskbar, so hopefully it will address user criticism of the context menu as well. Stay tuned for new Windows 11 preview builds, which usually arrive every Friday.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      I2D earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Dr Jared Dental Studio earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      RG INVESTMENT GROUP earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Very Popular
      The Norwegian Drone Pilot earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Very Popular
      s0nic69 earned a badge
      Very Popular
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      469
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      248
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      79
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      64
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      60
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!