This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Terrestrial planet article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 365 days
![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
|
So what about Pluto? It's clearly not a gas giant. So is it a terrestrial planet? Or is it a third class? Or do we not know?
Geophysically, Pluto is an icy terrestrial planet, in the same class as Triton. Double sharp ( talk) 08:30, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
In the good old days, when I first learned science, all living things were either animals or plants, and there were four terrestrial planets, four gas giants, plus Pluto with a question mark. Those old dichotomies were clearly inadequate. If the definition of terrestrial planet is intrinsic, i.e., depends only on the physical characteristics of the planet itself, then the Moon must be called a terrestrial planet. The definition does not make it clear whether having a rocky surface is a requirement. What if a planet is almost all rock and iron entirely covered with a few miles of ice? What if it's rock and iron, covered with an inpenetrable atmosphere of hydrogen and helium? What about Titan, which is a planet by any intrinsic definition? And what about Io? I suspect that there will be lots of overlapping classes of planets defined in the next generation, but that consensus on this issue will not soon be achieved. Vegasprof 11:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Judging by its low density (2.0g/cm3, Ceres should really be called an ice dwarf and not a terrestrial (dwarf) planet.
That density is much lower than that of the Moon, or Jupiter's inner large moons Io and Europa. If Ceres is a terrestrial (dwarf) planet, what about the Moon, Io and Europa??
Is there a maximum size (allowing for density, composition etc) which a terrestial planet can be? If so what would happen as the limit is reached (assuming that this is smaller than that required to produce a black hole? Jackiespeel ( talk) 17:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
What exactly is the purpose of that? I replaced it with the exact same picture, minus the moon and ceres, with a much shorter caption where we dont have to explain that the moon and ceres are in fact not planets. The one minus those two is superior and less confusing. Cadiomals ( talk) 00:05, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
I would actually have liked this picture if it had Vesta instead of Ceres. It is often called the smallest terrestrial planet, after all! Double sharp ( talk) 11:10, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Recently, a few known gas-giant uninhabitable planets orbit double stars. Scientists believe that rocky planets do not do so. Now, scientists believe that, it is possible for rocky planets too. Read more on this website:
http://phys.org/news/2015-03-rocky-planets-orbit-stars.html
MansourJE ( talk) 09:20 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Terrestrial planet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:06, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Terrestrial planet article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 365 days
![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
|
So what about Pluto? It's clearly not a gas giant. So is it a terrestrial planet? Or is it a third class? Or do we not know?
Geophysically, Pluto is an icy terrestrial planet, in the same class as Triton. Double sharp ( talk) 08:30, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
In the good old days, when I first learned science, all living things were either animals or plants, and there were four terrestrial planets, four gas giants, plus Pluto with a question mark. Those old dichotomies were clearly inadequate. If the definition of terrestrial planet is intrinsic, i.e., depends only on the physical characteristics of the planet itself, then the Moon must be called a terrestrial planet. The definition does not make it clear whether having a rocky surface is a requirement. What if a planet is almost all rock and iron entirely covered with a few miles of ice? What if it's rock and iron, covered with an inpenetrable atmosphere of hydrogen and helium? What about Titan, which is a planet by any intrinsic definition? And what about Io? I suspect that there will be lots of overlapping classes of planets defined in the next generation, but that consensus on this issue will not soon be achieved. Vegasprof 11:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Judging by its low density (2.0g/cm3, Ceres should really be called an ice dwarf and not a terrestrial (dwarf) planet.
That density is much lower than that of the Moon, or Jupiter's inner large moons Io and Europa. If Ceres is a terrestrial (dwarf) planet, what about the Moon, Io and Europa??
Is there a maximum size (allowing for density, composition etc) which a terrestial planet can be? If so what would happen as the limit is reached (assuming that this is smaller than that required to produce a black hole? Jackiespeel ( talk) 17:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
What exactly is the purpose of that? I replaced it with the exact same picture, minus the moon and ceres, with a much shorter caption where we dont have to explain that the moon and ceres are in fact not planets. The one minus those two is superior and less confusing. Cadiomals ( talk) 00:05, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
I would actually have liked this picture if it had Vesta instead of Ceres. It is often called the smallest terrestrial planet, after all! Double sharp ( talk) 11:10, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Recently, a few known gas-giant uninhabitable planets orbit double stars. Scientists believe that rocky planets do not do so. Now, scientists believe that, it is possible for rocky planets too. Read more on this website:
http://phys.org/news/2015-03-rocky-planets-orbit-stars.html
MansourJE ( talk) 09:20 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Terrestrial planet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:06, 22 January 2018 (UTC)