Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

ThymeIsTight t1_j3jwxhs wrote

I guess humans wouldn't be celebrating birthdays on Pluto.

383

Numerous-Afternoon89 t1_j3jxbty wrote

Good point! Made me think of an interesting sci-fi concept, having civilizations of people that live their entire lifetime experiencing only one season on a planet

215

tenehemia t1_j3kpkpf wrote

And we shall call this planet.. San Diego.

136

PUfelix85 t1_j3lm81e wrote

It means "A Whale's Vagina."

42

BigCommieMachine t1_j3ob3kk wrote

Objectively the best place in the United States

1

tenehemia t1_j3ob9y0 wrote

I only spent a week there, but it was pretty great and I'm looking forward to a longer return trip.

1

ThymeIsTight t1_j3jze71 wrote

Imagine how long the sporting seasons would be?

"During this NBA season, we've seen six generations of Jameseseseses: LeBron, Bronny, Bronson, Sonny, Akron, and DeBron."

102

ImSickOfYouToo t1_j3luhxj wrote

It would be almost as long as a modern NBA season

11

frickindeal t1_j3n1ono wrote

NASCAR ends on like Christmas Eve and starts back up early February.

2

Anonymoushero111 t1_j3k3bnq wrote

this and other types of varied worldly patterns are pretty common in scifi books. you don't need to have a new idea though, its about telling the story in an interesting way!

34

Delamoor t1_j3koq6w wrote

I also think it would be interesting to speculate on how sentient life would manage time on a tidally locked planet.

Without the sun rising and falling, there sure wouldn't be any circadian rhythms. Would there even be sleep? We aren't even entirely sure why it evolved here, so on a planet that never even experienced the sun's movement... Could be quite interesting.

26

2giga2dweebish t1_j3kywyu wrote

>We aren't even entirely sure why it evolved here,

Baseless speculation but if sleep is a time for recuperation, could it just be that complex organisms need downtime to process energy, slow down for a while, etc.?

16

waytosoon t1_j3lx60t wrote

This is my assumption. I think we would have to have some sort of resting time. It's interesting to look at how certain organisms have adapted to the regions of the world where there is not night/day cycle for extended periods. Cannabis Sativa, for instance, requires longer nights of about 12 hours in order for the plant to begin flowering. However, Cannabis Ruderalis, which was originally discovered in siberia, automatically flowers after around 30 days because as you can imagine, there is no break in light in the region for many months.

3

Bsmith0799 t1_j3lnz3x wrote

People in Alaska sleep, don't they? And Alaska has areas where the sun doesnt rise and set the way we're used to. So I'm sure we'd sleep.

11

Hikaru755 t1_j3lx1iy wrote

People haven't evolved sleep in Alaska, though. Sleep evolved waaaaayyy before humans even existed, let alone started living that close to the poles. And we've not been around for long enough for evolution to change anything about something so deeply integrated into the way our biology works as sleep.

8

chairfairy t1_j3lslh1 wrote

Harder to guess because Alaskans still have circadian rhythms - that's a basic biological function built into your brain, that a lot of life on earth evolved with. (I assume circadian rhythm predates humans, because other animals have it, too.)

In a tidally locked world, there would be no circadian rhythm, at least not one driven by the day/night light cycle. I mean yeah they'd probably still need to sleep but the underlying biological mechanisms would be completely different

6

mic_Ch t1_j3llnre wrote

We could all just migrate to the dark side each day

4

tranbo t1_j3lpj6o wrote

I mean if you had 209 years of summer then winter you would probs learn to hibernate too.

2

curiousmind111 t1_j3sfcqm wrote

Why is it called tidally locked?

2

Delamoor t1_j3ud8i8 wrote

Long answer that I'll try to make short, but basically... Because tidal forces.

The tide on earth comes from the spinning, and the gravity from the moon interacting with the earth's spin. The ocean's water sloshes about relatively easily, but the tidal forces (the gravity) is actually affecting everything, all the crust and mantle. The entire planet actually flexes a tiny, tiny bit with each spin.

That flexing carries a cost; energy has to come from somewhere and it has to go somewhere. So the flexing turns into thermal energy; heat. Only very slight on earth, but still there.

Jupiter's moon Io is a giant pile of volcanoes because of this effect. It's super close to Jupiter and still spins pretty quickly and so flexes a huge amount, generates a lot of heat, so lots of magma flying about.

But that heat radiates into space slowly. Which over billions of years means the spinning planet loses energy. Which means it spins slower and slower.

Eventually it stops spinning and will always have the same face pointing towards the bigger object. Just like our moon does now. Eventually, far far in the future, the earth will also stop spinning (because of the tidal forces) and one side will always face the moon. That's why we believe the days were much shorter when the planet was still newly formed; it spun faster, but has lost roughly half it's spinning speed over the last 4.5 billion years. Because of the moon.

That has happened with a lot of moons in the solar system (because moons are small and don't have store much energy) and it can happen with planets too. Usually, the closer the little thing is to the big thing (e.g. moon near planet, or planet near star) the faster the energy comes out of it, the sooner it stops spinning.

And the thing that causes that to happen... Tidal forces. Same forces that create the tides on Earth. Thus; locked into place by tidal forces; tidally locked.

We're just fortunate that we have the oceans which slosh about so easily and obviously, otherwise it would have taken us a lot longer to figure it out.

1

curiousmind111 t1_j3vd1my wrote

Interesting.

But what if we had no moon, and we didn’t spin - from the start. We just always had the same side facing the sun. That would have nothing to do with moons or tides. That’s why I was surprised to hear “tidal” in the comment. But. Googled and that’s what they call it.

Even stranger when there’s no water on the planet.

1

Delamoor t1_j3vswa0 wrote

Interestingly, that wouldn't be physically possible.

The process of accretion in zero gee creates angular momentum by its nature: stuff slams into other stuff and that kinetic energy has to go somewhere, and it can't go any further towards or back away from the centre of gravity... so it goes sideways and turns into a spin.

That's why neutron stars generally rotate near the speed of light; all that matter came inwards with the force of a supernova, so supercharged the spin. Also why black holes spin and accretion disk form. You basically can't have a body of matter coalesce in space without it starting to spin at least a bit. Well, unless you're physically there to carefully place the matter bit by bit with near zero kinetic force, anyway.

If we had no moon then there would be no signficant drag (though there would still be a tiny, tiny, tiny bit from the sun and other bodies in the solar system, but barely noticeable even in astronomical timescales), and we would for all intent and purposes basically never stop or slow our spinning.

1

curiousmind111 t1_j3yhf9l wrote

Nteresting. Even if we had water but no moon? I’m imaging that water adding Damone drag as we rotate. thanks for the Excellent answer!

1

babyeyez t1_j3lmnss wrote

Game of thrones kinda of did this with the summer children only experiencing summer and did not know winter

6

Carighan t1_j3kxn93 wrote

While it doesn't have specificially this, I was surprised how well the The long way to a small, angry planet-books explore alien cultures and concepts.

4

dark_hypernova t1_j3lpyhj wrote

Reminds me of this joke in Secret Agent Clank where a planet is in perpetual New Year's celebration because it only takes a few minutes for the planet to orbit the sun completely.

3

OJezu t1_j3l5pw9 wrote

Star Wars had single-biome planets, and no one bats an eye. Seasons on exoplanets are already an exotic idea in fiction. I believe the reason to be "don't think too hard about it".

1

DresdenPI t1_j3lv75f wrote

There's a planet in Starfinder like that. It experiences 200 year winters and summers. The local flora and fauna have evolved to change completely between summer and winter forms.

1

airplane001 t1_j3mqfdk wrote

Everything would probably be in interval of days. One Pluto day is 6.4 earth days

1

Artanthos t1_j3mxyfx wrote

You could just as easily use an ark ship.

No planet, sun, or any other inherent measure of time. Only the cycles arbitrarily imposed by the ship.

1

1mnotklevr t1_j3nfs2d wrote

Stargate SG1 "Brief Candle" episode where the humans age rapidly, and only live 100 days.

1

Aldren t1_j3k3twj wrote

I'm ~6 months old on Pluto!

5

DJDaddyD t1_j3kpitq wrote

Great-great grandpa get off reddit. This is no place for a 124 year old

20

chairfairy t1_j3lsqk8 wrote

In 2 Earth years, America will be 1 Pluto year old

5

arwinda t1_j3lg4x9 wrote

Can offer you a place there for your party. Guests must provide their own transportation.

2

Magmasoar t1_j3lsog5 wrote

They'd come up with something surely... Maybe birthdays aren't a thing but I'm sure there's some way they'd make up to count time

2

aeon100500 t1_j3lu5vn wrote

humans will probably always count it's age based on earths rotation. legacy habits never die

2

fishbulbx t1_j3lsn9x wrote

You'd just invent or repurpose a cyclical event to use for celebrations. It isn't like weeks are based on any real natural event. Humans just needed a recurring time segment of about 7 days.

1

I__Know__Stuff t1_j3m7j8m wrote

I'm pretty sure that weeks are derived from the phases of the moon.

1

fishbulbx t1_j3m8vzg wrote

Ok fine, then hours.

1

BLEUXJEE t1_j3n4thm wrote

Day and night divided into 12 as same relation between months and years.

1

AFineDayForScience t1_j3k141p wrote

This made me curious about the orbital speed of each planet.

Mercury: 47.87 km/s (107,082 miles per hour), or a period of about 87.97 days

Venus: 35.02 km/s (78,337 miles per hour), or a period of about 224.7 days

Earth: 29.78 km/s (66,615 miles per hour), or a period of about 365.256365 days

Mars: 24.077 km/s (53,853 miles per hour), or a period of about 686.93 days

Jupiter: 13.07 km/s (29,236 miles per hour), or a period of about 11.86 years

Saturn: 9.69 km/s (21,675 miles per hour), or a period of about 29.42 years

Uranus: 6.81 km/s (15,233 miles per hour), or a period of about 83.75 years

Neptune: 5.43 km/s (12,146 miles per hour), or a period of about 163.72 years

Pluto: 4.74 km/s (10,603 miles per hour), or a period of about 247.92 years

137

quarter-water t1_j3k6glj wrote

>Mercury: 47.87 km/s (107,082 miles per hour), or a period of about 87.97 days

Fun fact: A year on Mercury is 88 Earth days, but because of rotational resonance, a day is 175 Earth days if you were standing on Mercury.

114

Seraph062 t1_j3kn3ic wrote

> a day (one complete rotation) is 175 Earth days lol

A day isn't really a complete rotation.
A complete sidereal rotation (i.e. the time it takes to complete a single 360 degree rotation) on Mercury is about 59 Earth days.
However 'a day' is generally measured with respect to the parent star, and since Mercury is moving around the sun that represents a moving target, and it takes 175 Earth days for the sun complete one cycle in the sky (e.g. local noon -> local noon).

64

quarter-water t1_j3lm3a4 wrote

You're right, I added the parts in parenthesis after but it's not totally correct. The 175 day is how long someone on Mercury would feel like "a day" ie from noon to noon.

12

mic_Ch t1_j3llxm5 wrote

So when people say "I wish it could be Christmas everyday" we should send them to Mercury, as a bonus they get every other holiday thrown in for free!

7

Orodruin666 t1_j3mn8lj wrote

Would make visiting the inlaws truly last an eternity

3

afanofBTBAM t1_j3lxbk2 wrote

>(one rotation around the sun)

IIRC, this is called a revolution, and the term rotation is reserved for the celestial body itself spinning upon its axis.

2

quarter-water t1_j3lxo46 wrote

Yeah, it was late.. my post is full of holes lol I've edited jt now

2

gsohyeah t1_j3k7s2q wrote

What about degrees of revolution per time, per mass of the planet, per average distance from the sun? I feel like they'll all be the same number or are there more variables?

2

farmerarmor t1_j3jxq9x wrote

It was only a planet for 1/4 of one of its own years.

122

irbinator OP t1_j3k0kmx wrote

Right now I'm reading Dr. Mike Brown's book How I Killed Pluto And Why It Had It Coming. Only a couple of pages in, but so far it's been an interesting read.

Basically, he had discovered a new possible planet (Eris, aka Xena), and his discovery led scientists to finally formally define a planet for the first time. The new definition re-categorized Pluto and Eris as dwarf planets. Humbly, Dr. Brown was satisfied with that conclusion.

The book is what led me down this rabbit hole!

EDIT: Eris, not Ceres.

71

GetsGold t1_j3kc4mu wrote

He discovered Eris, which was more massive than Pluto.

Ceres was a planet that was discovered between Earth and Mars and Jupiter in 1801. Around 50 years later after several more planets were discovered in that region they started referring to them as asteroids instead.

That's similar to what happened with Pluto. At first it seemed unique in its part of the Solar System, but by the 90's we started discovering many other objects in that region, another belt. So with Eris they decided to treat it like the asteroid belt and stop calling its members planets.

43

irbinator OP t1_j3kfgei wrote

Ah, you’re completely right. Thanks! I always mix up Ceres and Eris. I’ll update my comment now.

10

eveninglands t1_j3lslcb wrote

Pluto has the surface area roughly the size of Russia.

Now, Russia is pretty big, but it ain't no planet.

Bye bye, giant frozen ice rock that is not a planet, you shall not be missed!

4

INTHEMIDSTOFLIONS t1_j3m8yhr wrote

Yeah, it was Eris, makemake, hamaeu, and a few others in 2005. They had the option to add 4 more planets, or they could re define what a planet was.

3

10secondmessage t1_j3k2jfb wrote

You do know Roman's actually figured out Pluto before 1930. Just was observable till 1930

−18

irbinator OP t1_j3k2u45 wrote

I didn't, actually. Source?

12

10secondmessage t1_j3k3yx3 wrote

Sorry, I think it was Greeks they did math and found grational forces outside of expectations, according to their limited data. They knew something else orbited out there just obviously couldn't prove it with telescopes. Which was the transfered to Pluto in Roman mythologies. If greeks/Roman's named planets how was Pluto named after this object?

−20

GetsGold t1_j3kcg0m wrote

They didn't have math at that level. You're describing how Neptune was discovered, but that was in the 1800s. It was found due to irregularities in the path of Uranus that would be explained by another planet.

Further discrepancies led to searching for another planet, and that led to finding Pluto. However Pluto was later found to be too small to explain them.

26

10secondmessage t1_j3kds0k wrote

They used math well not as good as what we had. There are many asteroids that went of course due to what we now call Neptune and Pluto as the gravity it caused movements inconsistent with its path. Since they corectly guessed objects had no mass and traveled straight short of external forces such as gravity or transition of energy such as object acting to them selfs. This led to them thinking there were more plants based on this but could prove more than a gravitional force more likely planet based on planet behaviors they could observe. Like I said they knew about it but could say 100 what it was.

−15

GetsGold t1_j3kdztv wrote

They didn't even know about Neptune and almost certainly didn't know about Uranus even though it was technically just barely visible. They weren't making gravitational predictions about Pluto thousands of years ago when we couldn't even do that ourselves a hundred years ago.

20

10secondmessage t1_j3kfn4s wrote

Like I said, they couldn't prove they were but estimated planets of other data. they had tools that would help them find objects such as Mars or a comet around Mars, etc. When in certain areas, there tools would be slightly off due to gravitational fields of large masses out beyond visible range. Well, the math was basic it proved there was what essentially was discovered. I'm not saying they had the tech or power that was used to conferm them like others later, only that in certain areas, masses existed and likely to be planets.

−12

GetsGold t1_j3kgeoa wrote

They did not predict the existence of Uranus, Neptune and Pluto thousands of years ago based on gravity. We couldn't even predict Pluto with modern equipment and math. You need some sources on this.

12

10secondmessage t1_j3kizk7 wrote

Yes, they did when a commit is tracked for say a long time and their machine. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_Mechanism

Was off on predicting a comets path, which means they knew some new or force was being but on it. Considering greeks and Roman's had many scientist back then tracking things with similar results they estimate more planets or forces out there affecting a comets path, especially since the mass moved in the sky as disruptions were tracked as planets moved in their orbit.

This theory was still theory, but they knew more forces were out there. Because well not perfect as ours they had working orbit and trackable system. They were able to track and predict comets' paths with it when something moved a commit and no planet was around to have force on is how they realized other wandering masses must be out there. They knew there had to be other things affecting that they could observe things like this. So the theories were write just not provable. At there level of ablities.

−4

GetsGold t1_j3kjx66 wrote

So you're saying that they estimated comet paths but were off and so hypothesized the existence of other bodies or forces? Is there a quote in the article about that?

That's interesting, but not the same as predicting specific planets, and especially Pluto. Pluto is less than a fifth the mass of our moon and orbiting 30+ times the distance from the Sun as us. They wouldn't have close to the precise data to estimate that.

6

AndrewTyeFighter t1_j3kwsxp wrote

They didn't even know how gravity worked back then and were just starting to consider that the Earth might not be the center of the universe.

They were not predicting planets that they couldnt see or comets paths based on gravity when they didnt even have the formulas and constants required to do such things.

4

10secondmessage t1_j3kyr1q wrote

Yes, they did otherwise. How would they have made the first model of solar system it was wrong because gravity wasn't factored into it when the second model came out it traced orbits based on the concept of gravity, well the calculations were not hundred percent it still was close enough when you applied it in small numbers to find location of said item. Considering there limited tech and understanding it's amazing how well they did.

Second Ancient thinkers, from Aristotle in the West to Brahmagupta in the East, had theorised that objects were attracted to each other. Which is partially right as Newton would add direction(towards the centre) and give it mathemical representation/ gravitational force direction which change how the angle of force. Even though they math was off, they still had gravational force as a force of attraction espressesed as the orbital pathes of planets. The method was not perfect as it only counted gravational force, but that still put into their measurements and comparison.

−4

AndrewTyeFighter t1_j3l42ut wrote

Don't need to understand gravity to make a model of the observable solar system. Yet just because you make a model that is consistent with your observations, doesn't mean your model is correct.

The Antikythera Mechanism didn't model wasn't accurate because their understanding of the planetary model was incorrect. It also did not compute comets at all.

Aristotle thought that comets were atmospheric in nature, not bodies orbiting around the solar system, and on gravity he thought that everything was attracted to the Earth because it was the center of the universe, as well as that heavier objects would fall faster. These are not the basis for calculating the positions of undiscovered planets or gravitational disturbances of orbits of comets.

Your statements here are so wildly contradictory to history that I can only assume you are mistaken. If you really do feel you are correct, then please find some sources they actually back up your claims.

6

Civil_Speed_8234 t1_j3l8fbt wrote

Planets up to Saturn were known to the ancient Greeks, but Uranus, Neptune and Pluto were named after the invention of the telescope (with the first one in 1781), and they just continued the naming convention in the same way. All the moons, dwarf planets, planetoids and other things in our solar system were named for Roman myths as well, but most of them weren't known until much more recently

6

goodlittlesquid t1_j3ztgx6 wrote

Many of the more recently discovered dwarf planets are named after deities from other cultures. Haumea is Hawaiian, Makemake is Rapa Nui, Sedna is Inuit, Gonggong is Chinese. The moons of Uranus are named after English literary characters from Shakespeare and Alexander Pope.

1

Civil_Speed_8234 t1_j40n7ns wrote

Thanks for adding this, I did know, but since it had nothing to do with the point I was making I failed to mention it

1

Ahhhhrg t1_j3ln0fz wrote

You do know you’re talking absolute garbage? If you could actually back up your statement with a source (spoiler: there isn’t any) instead?

4

8020secret t1_j3k6mz6 wrote

Still legally a planet when passing over New Mexico, USA

4

GravitationalEddie t1_j3kkd7b wrote

Still a planet no matter. Peter Dinklage is still a human wherever he is.

−16

alexmikli t1_j3k1s5q wrote

And apparently they're considering bringing it back

−2

Dolly_gale t1_j3l69nl wrote

I attended a "planet walk" hosted by the astronomy department of a state university. It was about a mile long. Participants start at the sun and as they walk along there is a little model and informational placard about each planet. When I got to Neptune, I got a little sad and kept walking. Turned out that they included a model of Pluto. When I returned to the beginning, I mentioned to one of the host students how delighted I was to see it. I asked why it was included despite the fact it wasn't a planet anymore.

"It's still there," she answered.

15

Underscore_Blues t1_j3lu46a wrote

Then you should have been asking where Eris was, as it's larger than Pluto. Her answer was bad and not truthful.

−3

Dolly_gale t1_j3moyka wrote

Well, they also represented the asteroid belt. Perhaps they should have called it the "Solar system walk" instead of "planet walk."

3

Remy4409 t1_j3jx0rj wrote

And nobody alive today will be there when it does, crazy.

117

z7q2 t1_j3kttcq wrote

The best part is, Pluto doesn't care. Call it a planet, don't call it a planet. It was out there orbiting before us, and it will be there when we're gone.

34

newtownkid t1_j3kcyy1 wrote

Technically Pluto's orbit takes one year.

27

wwarnout t1_j3k48mp wrote

As I recall, Neptune has barely finished one orbit since its discovery.

22

JimmmyDriver t1_j3nmu0l wrote

Indeed. Completed first orbit since discorvery in June of 2011.

6

8020secret t1_j3k6j14 wrote

Still a planet while passing over state of New Mexico 👽

By law

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO that, as Pluto passes overhead through New Mexico's excellent night skies, it be declared a planet

https://www.nmlegis.gov/sessions/.../HJM054.html

22

5050Clown t1_j3kxxll wrote

ME: Hey Pluto. How many Pluto years have you been a planet now?

​

Pluto: Fuck you.

18

eveninglands t1_j3lsza4 wrote

"Eyy yo Pluto! You know what else is 500x smaller than its earthly counterpart?? yo dick!!"

6

ReallyBadNuggets t1_j3kuybf wrote

TIL Pluto was discovered in 1930.

So it wasn't even considered a planet for all that long to begin with.

11

DoctorSalt t1_j3l7jcr wrote

I moved to Flagstaff where it was discovered. It's great to live in a Dark Sky Community

2

Dark_Vulture83 t1_j3lkf66 wrote

I find it funny that it was discovered, and then de-listed as a planet without completing a single orbit.

5

Big_Deetz t1_j3m87ou wrote

Another fun fact, everyone reading this thread right now will almost certainly be dead before it does make its full orbit in 2172.

5

[deleted] t1_j3nk111 wrote

[deleted]

2

Big_Deetz t1_j3npjaf wrote

Life extending technology? Cryosleep? Maybe some billionaire teen authoritarian prince who'll have their organs swapped out when they get old is reading this?

I unno man, that's a long time for science.

1

Who_DaFuc_Asked t1_j3o29rs wrote

The NASA mission I'm most hyped for is Dragonfly. Planned 2027 launch to Saturn's moon Titan (will arrive in the early or mid 2030's, I'll be like 37 or 38 years old by then and I'm 26 now).

It's a helicopter drone that'll fly around on Titan.

After that, I think in the 2030's or 2040's they're planning on sending a lander to Venus that'll take pictures of it's surface as it's falling through the atmosphere. It's like a big metal orb looking thing

1

ripper_14 t1_j3lsmv0 wrote

Can’t wait til Planet X shows itself too!

3

noronto t1_j3ls2cy wrote

I wish there was context to these TIL. This one in particular gets reposted all the time. I don’t understand the rabbit hole somebody finds themselves in to learn about this grade school level fact.

2

Sunshineinanchorage t1_j3lt1zu wrote

Someone reminded me once that Reddit is an international app meaning what one individual learned in K-12 another learns from reading subs. 🤷🏽‍♀️

5

noronto t1_j3ltmuu wrote

That’s fair, but I’d still be curious how many of these TIL are discovered. For instance, I was looking up “your anus” but it got autocorrected to Uranus, which started me reading random facts about planets and stuff.

2

Sunshineinanchorage t1_j3lurpl wrote

🤣🤣 I love a good joke this early in the morning. Especially when it is older than I am. Of course I am not sure why you are interested in my anus in particular nor am I not sure why you seem to struggle with a basic google search. Try again.🤣🤣

1

noronto t1_j3mavqx wrote

I am not interested in “your anus”, nor am I confused with the google machine. I am interested in the context in which the peoples are learning these random facts. TIL that gorillas are in a semi permanent state of flatulence. That’s a random fact. Why and how did you come to obtain this knowledge? That is what is interesting.

Clearly I am interested in butts and stuff. So that’s why I know a lot about them.

1

Sunshineinanchorage t1_j3msnbj wrote

🤣🤣🤣Whatever you say🤣🤣🤣

1

noronto t1_j3mv3l1 wrote

Unless you were familiar with the semi permanent flatulence state of gorillas. Maybe you should author a TIL post and give this “discussion” as context?

1

astroteacher t1_j3mhtno wrote

Pluto was closer to the sun than Neptune from about 1980-2000. Probably why it’s moon wasn’t discovered until about 1978.

2

Dawnawaken92 t1_j3n72kp wrote

It'll forever be a planet in my family.

2

Cut-OutWitch t1_j3ku8ff wrote

> Pluto was discovered in 1930.

By the great-uncle of Clayton Kershaw! Woooooooo!

1

yusuo85 t1_j3lpz5j wrote

I read somewhere not long ago that pluto hasn't even completed a full rotation since America was founded, guess that's kind of still true.

1

DresdenPI t1_j3lud45 wrote

RemindMe! February 18th, 2178

1

sexysouthernaccent t1_j3mel21 wrote

A fun fact to bring up to people that insist the alignment of planets at the time of their birth means something

1

FredVIII-DFH t1_j3oq85a wrote

So... we don't actually KNOW that it orbits the sun.

1

AUWarEagle82 t1_j3oy5ai wrote

TIL: Pluto's orbit is measured in "Mickeys" and each "Mickey" is 1/248th of a full orbit.

1

All_cheeki_n0_breeki t1_j3pccdf wrote

Various mezoamerican cultures like the aztecs and the mayans, were very aware of Pluto.

I guess you could said it hasn't completed an obbrit since eurocentric cultures discovered it.

1

Arch3m t1_j3kc3xa wrote

Ah, yes, the real reason Pluto isn't a planet. Gotta make one rotation before it gets the upgrade, y'know, just to prove that it can.

0

p-d-ball t1_j3nb39n wrote

That means Pluto has no orbit! It's never been fully observed and it never will be. Ha!

​

/s, of course. Making fun of creationists, etc.

0

Due-Reading6335 t1_j3l0qm2 wrote

fun vague fact: some planets were theorized to exist and have only been recently confirmed. I've heard there's a 10th celestial body orbiting our sun, further than Pluto, that has not been spotted yet.

−5

Cisish_male t1_j3m4aaa wrote

You mean Hamuea, Eris, or Makemake?

Or one of the newer ones that's been confirmed like Orcus or Gongong?

0

GeneralTittyFucker t1_j3jz8rc wrote

I want to fuck Pluto.

Edit: Sorry, didn't realize this was about the planet

−8

[deleted] t1_j3k3r86 wrote

[deleted]

−10

StarWhoLock t1_j3lpex2 wrote

Not sure why you're being downvoted. I'm sure a lot of redditors would be happy to strap those three onto a ticket and launch it at the far reaches of the solar system.

1

FamiGami t1_j3jww95 wrote

Pretty sure you learned that in grade school like the rest of us

−12

gsohyeah t1_j3k7yy6 wrote

Oh, look at Mister "I went to an expensive Copernican school" over here.

10

FamiGami t1_j3lt5ol wrote

You mean any public school in western civilization?

−1