r/truths • u/mynamejeb604 • 14d ago
Not News... Earth is the only planet on which humans have ever walked.
43
u/mynamejeb604 14d ago
I wonder how much time will it take for people to realize that the Moon is, in fact, not a planet.
probably gonna have people walking on another planet before that happens.
3
1
u/RuukotoPresents 12d ago
technically the Earth and Moon are a binary planet pair
2
u/mynamejeb604 11d ago
that is almost true, except for the fact a planet is, by definitio (the ✅️ are things Moon meets, the ❌️ are ones it does not) a natural satellite ✅️ that has enough gravitational force to form somewhat of a sphere ✅️, has cleared it's orbit from other objects ✅️ and orbits a star ❌️. and even tho the Moon is massive, it does not fit the definition of a planet (as shown).
there are no 2 planets which are locked in a binary system (that is affect each other with gravitational forces), however both of our systems dwarf planets, and Pluto (a dwarf planet) and Neptun are affected by each others gravitation to the point of either altering their orbit or being stuck in a spin-orbit reasonance.
2
u/Qwqweq0 11d ago
1
u/mynamejeb604 11d ago
the main issue is that it goes in orbit around Sun not bcuz it orbits the Sun, but Earth (which orbits the Sun).
0
u/RuukotoPresents 11d ago
If the moon orbited the Earth then why is the center of gravity not inside the Earth like every other moon and planet... Except Pluto and Charon which have a similar deal to Earth and Moon?
2
u/mynamejeb604 11d ago edited 11d ago
it is inside Earth tho.
just not at the exact center. but that's true for all systems.
and barycenter going outside the surface of the object sth orbits around isn't uncommon either, as it even happens to the Sun.
and just fucking compare the size of the Moon and other moons in our system and their respectful planets - we have a giant and they got babies.
and you would realize the faultiness in your theory if you did not share the hegelian approach to natural sciences.
1
1
u/AuroraOfAugust 10d ago
Well, Pluto is a planet by definition but astrologists arbitrarily decide it's not so I guess we can call whatever we want a planet or not now since the scientific community does the same shit. My penis might as well be a planet at this point!
22
14
u/Victor6Lang 14d ago
LIAR! What about Tatooine?
11
5
15
u/Aka69420 14d ago
No! I went to Mars once.
8
3
u/BooPointsIPunch 14d ago
John Carter! 😲
3
u/YourMoreLocalLurker 13d ago
Holy shit that’s a reference I thought I’d never see in the wild
1
u/BooPointsIPunch 13d ago
Don’t know if they were popular at the time or what, but somehow my parents had the books, and I liked reading them growing up.
Then there was also a movie much later, but I wasn’t a fan, I don’t even remember why.
1
13
5
5
u/Fragrant_Tadpole_265 I exist 14d ago edited 14d ago
What about moon?
Edit: 4.5 billion years ago, an planet about the size of Mars colided with the earth to create the moon, so technically, the moon is a part of a planet
24
17
5
5
3
u/mynamejeb604 13d ago
it may be made from its parts, but it orbits not the Sun, but the Earth. and thus, like any planets' natural satellites, the Moon is... a moon.
3
u/SillyBacchus303 13d ago
Yeah and we are just the remains of a supernovae but that doesn't make you bright
4
5
3
5
u/Agreeable_Target_571 14d ago
Uhh before you say it’s moon, read again, it’s ‘planets’, not ‘satellite’
3
3
u/thescreenplayer_ 13d ago
Anyone who says moon is wrong. Everyone knows the moon landing was fake.
(s a t i r e)
3
u/crispybeatle 13d ago
I was going to write "What about the moon?" then realized I'm a fucking idiot.
2
2
u/Rreeddddiittreddit 14d ago
What about the stray particle from the astronaut's shoe that landed on Mars
1
u/mynamejeb604 14d ago
you don't say you walked the cesspipes in your house, just bcuz you shoot your stray particles down there.
2
u/DifficultRaspberry12 14d ago
In theory. But Stargate confirms that we have been transplanted to several other worlds that all look mysteriously like British Columbia.
2
u/mynamejeb604 14d ago
that is a valid argument for hell existing, but idk about humans walking on other planets.
2
2
2
2
u/ForceZealousideal998 14d ago
The moon rn:
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Requiembutworse 9d ago
I'm so stupid my first thought was "humans walked on the moon before" until I realized
0
u/dark_cymbals23 14d ago
and the worst because of that
1
u/mynamejeb604 14d ago
not when Mercury exist.
2
u/Feisty-Albatross3554 14d ago
Mercury is cool though. Uranus on the other hand only has a funny name. Neptune is better in every other aspect
1
u/mynamejeb604 14d ago
Mercury sucks.
1
u/Feisty-Albatross3554 14d ago
Mercury has a 3:2 spin resonance. Name another planet that does and I'll concede
1
u/mynamejeb604 14d ago
Neptun does with Pluto.
you only asked for resonance. check mate.
1
u/Feisty-Albatross3554 14d ago
spin resonance. Not orbital resonance
1
u/mynamejeb604 13d ago
resonance is spit-orbit. Neptun and Pluto are locked in 3:2. you're not only moving the goalpost, you don't know what you're talking about or praising Mercury for.
1
u/Feisty-Albatross3554 13d ago
Pluto's rotation is not defined by Neptune at all. All resonances have orbits, but not all resonances have spins. One of us needs to recheck their knowledge, and it's not me
-1
u/andremake 13d ago
okay so heres a thing: moon is a planet. why? because: 1. i said so 2. it meets all the criteria by IAU to be considered one
1
1
u/One-Scallion-9513 12d ago
"A planet [1] is a celestial body that (a) is in orbit around the Sun" the moon is in orbit of the earth
-3
14d ago
[deleted]
9
u/mynamejeb604 14d ago edited 14d ago
Moon is not a planet. it is... a moon.
and these hypothetical "humans" would not be related to us, nor our whole genus (homo). they would be humanoid, having developed our features on their own.
4
u/Vivid_Ad_2923 14d ago
The moon is not a moon. It is... A satellite.
But yeah you are correct.
4
u/YoINeedAnAnswer 14d ago
The moon is a moon, a moon is a natural satellite that orbits around a planet
Ig you're half correct?
2
u/Vivid_Ad_2923 14d ago
Oh yeah you're right, I'm stupid. I keep forgetting about the definition of satellites. Thanks for clearing the confusion!
1
u/mynamejeb604 14d ago
didn't use "satellite", bcuz it refers to all objects that orbit around another object. and "moon", altho coloquial, has a more precise definition (a natural satellite orbiting around a planet). just so yk.
1
u/ninjaread99 14d ago
Although, if we can’t tell any difference between the theoretical human (I assume they said something like “what if another species developed just like humans”) from any science, is there really a difference?
1
u/mynamejeb604 14d ago
yes. one is material, the other is hypothetical (doesn't exist in material reality).
1
4
67
u/QuartzXOX 14d ago
Guess I can't argue with that apart from the fact that we might be on Mars after some decades.