The Media Science Guide to Planetary Classification

The only place for all Non Celestia Discussion/Stuff
Topic author
ajtribick
Developer
Posts: 1855
Joined: 11.08.2003
With us: 21 years 2 months

The Media Science Guide to Planetary Classification

Post #1by ajtribick » 14.03.2006, 12:03

A quick guide for the perplexed.

Extrasolar Planets

Mass > 100 Earths: Jupiterlike

All planets bigger than 100 Earths are gas giants like Jupiter. This classification applies to all objects which are not fusing stars. All objects in this range are similar to Jupiter, regardless of location in a solar system. The term "brown dwarf" leads to confusion and should be avoided.

30 Earths < Mass < 100 Earths: Saturnlike

All objects in this mass range are gas giants like Saturn, regardless of position in a solar system. Planets in this mass range always have some kind of ring system when depicted.

Mass < 30 Earths: Super-earths

All planets in this mass range are rocky or icy worlds with a solid surface and rocky core. They usually have thin atmospheres. Worlds below about fifteen Earth masses are "Earthlike". This applies regardless of temperature. There are no planets in this mass range which are gas giants.

Pulsar planets: Optional passing references

Pulsar planets get in the way of the magic "Earthlike" classification, so do not need to be mentioned.

Planets in multiple star systems: Tatooine-like

The term "Tatooine-like" arises because no other fictional planets have more than one sun. This remarkable innovation in science fiction is a testament to the great genius of George Lucas.

Solar system

Any object beyond Neptune: 10th planet

Any large object discovered beyond the orbit of Neptune (excluding Pluto, which is the ninth planet) is the tenth planet. The fact that this results in multiple tenth planets is irrelevant because the intervals between the discoveries is long enough for the public to forget the last one.

Inner system asteroids: Armageddon

Any asteroid in the inner solar system is an imminent threat to all life on Earth. The term "Armageddon" comes from the first and only movie to depict an asteroid impact on the Earth.

Avatar
selden
Developer
Posts: 10192
Joined: 04.09.2002
With us: 22 years 1 month
Location: NY, USA

Post #2by selden » 14.03.2006, 14:36

Being a little sarcastic, are we?

;)

p.s.
Personally, I found "Deep Impact" somewhat more enjoyable than that other movie.
Selden

Dollan
Posts: 1150
Joined: 18.12.2003
Age: 54
With us: 20 years 9 months
Location: Havre, Montana

Post #3by Dollan » 14.03.2006, 15:05

:lol: Oh, those last few entries were good...!

...John...
"To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe..."
--Carl Sagan

Hunter Parasite
Posts: 265
Joined: 18.09.2005
With us: 19 years
Location: CT

Post #4by Hunter Parasite » 15.03.2006, 00:54

Im glad they only made 1 armageddon movie.

Malenfant
Posts: 1412
Joined: 24.08.2005
With us: 19 years 1 month

Post #5by Malenfant » 15.03.2006, 01:15

Deep Impact was good. All copies of Armageddon should be burned for the sake of knowledge, along with Volcano. :)
My Celestia page: Spica system, planetary magnitudes script, updated demo.cel, Quad system


Return to “Petit Bistro Entropy”