The Earth is unique to our solar system, but there are many, many solar systems within just our own galaxy, to say nothing of the billions of galaxies we know are out there.
Jupiter and Saturn are referred to as gas giants. We really don't know enough about those two planets -- for all we know they could contain some kind of life way down below the cloud tops. If they did, would they qualify as planets, or are there some other characteristics an orbiting body should have to earn the planetary title?
2006-11-30 04:40:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Aren't each of those other planets ALSO unique? Different sizes, different atmospheres, different compositions, different temperatures make them as unique as Earth! Each has a unique gravitational and magnetic field. Each has unique moons, or lacks them completely.
Earth is unique in that it is the correct distance from the Sun to have an atmosphere and liquid water, affording life. But each of the other planets also is unique unto itself.
The suggestion that other planets should be called something else asks for a change of the definition of "planet", which occurred recently when Pluto was demoted to "minor planet" status. You'll play h3ll getting the IAU to change the designation again to make Earth the only planet....
2006-11-30 04:45:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by xraytech 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I guess, in time, we would eventually change over to their name. However, if the name is in any way complicated for us to say, then we might stick to Saturn for a little while more, if only as a back-up name (Did you hear about our Ambassador to Qkiwx@llcroptfg? -- where? -- Saturn! -- Oh that ambassador... yeah, I've heard.) In many place names on Earth, we have noted two trends: 1) it takes time to revert to the name used by the inhabitants and, 2) even after the official name is recognised, we continue to use the former name for a long time, especially if it is an area that we know little about (or if the name is difficult to use). There are examples of this in the Canadian Arctic where, for a long time, "southerners" kept using the names given by French and English explorers, even though the Inuits had names that they used (and still use).
2016-05-23 05:13:07
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Gah! And I bet you represent the people who changed pluto into a dwarf planet too! These are names that have been set since ancient times, when people didn't know what the surface of these planets was like.
PS: The official qualifiers for a planet are very vauge, and mostly have to do with certain aspects of it, of which Pluto fails one.
The rules for a planet are set by the International Astronomical Union, and are as follows: 1. It must orbit the sun (check) 2. It must have enough gravity to be roughly a sphere (check) and 3. It must have cleared its orbit of objects (enough debate to demote it to dwarf). The IAU says Pluto fails numero three, but Jupiter and the gas giants pass with flying colors.
2006-11-30 04:40:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by pito16places 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
The planets after four are what is called gas planets they have a solid core but when the solar system was being created they began to gather gas around the solid core. that is why they are so much larger
2006-11-30 06:15:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The definition of planet has to do with size. Jupiter for example barely missed the next level. If Jupiter was a little larger it would be called something else (some form of a star I think).
2006-11-30 04:40:39
·
answer #6
·
answered by jasonheavilin 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
Still it's a planet if you knew the deff. of a planet you would know that my dude.
2006-11-30 04:39:05
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Mercury? Venus? Mars? No frozen gas.
2006-11-30 04:39:28
·
answer #8
·
answered by Vince M 7
·
0⤊
3⤋