[extropy-chat] Our Solar System Planets

[KAZ]

----- Original Message ----
From: Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com>
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 1:42:44 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Our Solar System Planets


> "My very eccentric mother's cook just served us nine pastry coated xylophones"

Unfortunately, they didn't have the guts to actually propose Xena as UB232's name, so it almost certainly won't end up being called that, ruining your otherwise perfectly normal and realistic mnemonic.
 
I still think Ceres is a boring name, and anyway 4 Vesta has nearly the same mass, so it's silly that it's disqualified purely because a coincidence has one more slightly more spheroid than the other.
 
Has it occurred to anyone else here that the "binary planet" explanation -- the center of orbit is outside of the two bodies -- is an implicit admission that Jupiter/Sol are a binary star? 
 
The common center of orbit between Sol and Jupiter is outside of Sol, it wobbles farther than its own radius.
 
Jupiter is actually a brown dwarf, a protostar which is indefinitely stuck in the first stage of stellar ignition, producing its own heat.
 
They should just take the next step and call Jupiter a star and its gravitationally relaxed moons "planets".
 
How many planets would Jupiter have, then?
 
Oh, and bear in mind that Luna's primary orbit is not around the earth, but around Sol. I'm not kidding; look it up. Maybe it should be a planet, too. 
 
In a sense, Luna's more of a planet than Charon. Ironically, Charon's primary orbit is around Pluto, while I /think/ Pluto's primary orbit is around Sol -- Charon is only 11% of Pluto's mass. 
 
--
Words of the Sentient:
Education is a method whereby one acquires a higher grade of prejudices.
                        --Laurence J. Peter
E-Mail: KazVorpal at yahoo.com
Yahoo Messenger/AIM/AOL: KazVorpal
MSN Messenger: KazVorpal at yahoo.com
ICQ: 1912557
http://360.yahoo.com/kazvorpal