{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
10/7/2016 7:56:02 PM
20
Pluto isn't a planet, though. It's a dwarf planet. The title "The Nine" most likely doesn't reference the planets of our solar system.
(I'm at work at the moment, so that's as far as I got for now. I'm very interested in reading the rest of this post later.)
English
-
We can't forget Pluto in this equation. Even if the Traveler didn't terraform it, we colonized the Moon easily. And there is evidence of the Jovian planets, including Neptune, were colonized, or at least their moons. If that is the case, which it is, then groups such as the Russian Federal Bureau of Aeronautics (РФЬА) could probably use Neptune as a launch point to Pluto, which is a mineral-rich planet.
-
Perhaps. But that doesn't mean Pluto has any significance to The Nine. Remember, there are many other celestial objects that fall into the same category as Pluto. Pluto only has significance to people because it used to be classified as a planet, but not anymore. People don't like change.
-
Pluto, while being classified as a dwarf, does not mean it's not a planet. It just means it is a smaller planet that does not meet our standards. People think that being a dwarf planet means you aren't a planet, which is incorrect. If we find a planet larger than the sun, are we going to call it a colossus planet? Look at the "gas giants".
-
I'm well-versed in astronomy, and am very familiar with what a gas giant is. Having said that, based on our current understanding of physics, a planet cannot be larger than the Sun. It would collapse under the weight of its own gravity. We can discuss the classification of Pluto all day long, but it's not really relevant to the discussion at hand. There's no feasible reason for Pluto to be significant to The Nine when it is just one of many Kuiper Belt Objects.
-
Also, if Pluto were part of the Kuiper, it is the largest object there. Wouldn't this mean that there would be a far larger clump of objects from the belt following it around, caught in its gravity? And wouldn't the combined gravity of the belt keep it close by? It can't really be a stray.
-
Think about it. We keep trying to deduce that Pluto is part of the Kuiper Belt, but if it were, then why is there only Charon orbiting it and not a bunch of other, smaller KBOs that were caught in its gravity field? It's the largest identified object that could be part of the belt, so why is the only object in tow Charon? What about smaller objects that could possibly be orbitals? And there are tens of thousands of KBOs in the Kuiper Belt, so [i]how did Pluto drift away, if that is the case?[/i] Also, not trying to be offensive and rude, but choosing Pluto as my biggest flaw of many in this theory is a little nit-picky. Interesting to talk about, but nit-picky.
-
It's a good theory, and I like it. I just get nit-picky when it comes to astronomy, sorry about that. As for why Pluto doesn't have other bodies in tow, I'd hazard a guess that it's because everything is so ridiculously far from each other in that belt. It's very likely that most KBOs simply never fall into the gravitational influence of anything more local than the Sun itself. It could very well be that Charon and Pluto are an unlikely pairing, an oddity in a belt of lone ice-rocks. But that's just my guess. Admittedly, I haven't read up a lot on KBOs. I tend to keep to stars, black holes, magnetars, and the like.
-
由ArcaniKnifez编辑： 10/10/2016 1:18:52 AMWell, good sir. As a fellow astronomy enthusiast, I must concede. What I meant was planets around the same size of the Sun, or smaller. I understand there is no planet larger than the sun that is possible, but you must consider the idea that there are planets far bigger than Jupiter.
-
There really is no planet that we know of that even approaches the size of the Sun. [url=http://imgur.com/2QyGIQR]Here[/url], you'll see a size comparison between the Sun and the planets of our solar system. Take note of Jupiter. [url=http://imgur.com/QbRIVGj]Here[/url], you'll see a size comparison between Jupiter and the largest planet yet discovered, TrES-4b. By our current understanding of physics, TrES-4b is too large to even exist as a planet. I understand that it's certainly possible for Sun-sized planets to exist in such a vast universe as our own, but so far, none have been observed.
-
Goodness, I'm rusty. Thank you for reminding me. However, I noticed a logical flaw, and I'm not saying that it's yours, it's that of astronomers. We've discovered TrES-4b, but for some reason it does not seem to "exist" as a planet because of our understanding of physics. If that is the case, then shouldn't we change our notion of astrophysics to include planets like this? This is a little vague to me.
-
What I meant was that, by our current understanding of physics, TrES-4b should collapse under the weight of its own gravity in a kind of "micronova." If physics work the way we understand them, there must be some internal force pushing outward in opposition to gravity, similar to what nuclear fusion does for stars. So either we don't know as much about physics as we thought, or there's something going on with TrES-4b that we don't yet understand. I don't know which scenario is more likely.
-
由UnboundRelyks编辑： 10/7/2016 9:02:46 PMIn my mind, "The Nine" most likely refers to the number of people that are in the faction. It's pretty simplistic, but the most simple answers are often the ones that are correct. I think The Nine is comprised of nine mysterious beings with some unknown ability or knowledge that sets them apart from the other factions in the solar system.
