Comment by ben_w
21 hours ago
It's perfectly coherent to argue that gas giants should count failed stars rather than as planets, given the boundary between them is under debate.
21 hours ago
It's perfectly coherent to argue that gas giants should count failed stars rather than as planets, given the boundary between them is under debate.
It's perfectly irrelevant to the thread.
This thread is ~
As the easiest to discover exoplanets (and all the early ones except pulsar planets) are gas giants, and the comment I was directly replying to had "Like a gas giant orbiting a star. It's obviously a planet", therefore "gas giants are failed stars and shouldn't count as planets" is not at all irrelevant.
Even further up to the point of if these are or are not cell, it illustrates how taxonomical categories are made by humans for humans. Historically, any connection to natural laws in taxonomies is often mere coincidence.