It was only in 1969 (nice) that fungi officially became its own separate kingdom.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    61 day ago

    Similarly, “a planet” can be understood in technical or colloquial context which changes the meaning. It can have a specific meaning or a vague flexible meaning, just like with berries.

    BTW raspberries are my favorite berries… sort of. Watermelons are pretty good too.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      213 hours ago

      Actually planet doesn’t have any hard set definition, we kind of just do it case by case because its damn near impossible to come up with a rigid definition that doesn’t suddenly classify some planets as moons or some moons as planets or create weird situations in which an object can switch between the two.

      • wanderer
        link
        fedilink
        English
        310 hours ago

        The International Astronomical Union (IAU) defined in August 2006 that, in the Solar System, a planet is a celestial body that:

        1. is in orbit around the Sun,
        2. has sufficient mass to assume hydrostatic equilibrium (a nearly round shape), and
        3. has “cleared the neighbourhood” around its orbit.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAU_definition_of_planet

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          35 hours ago

          And in that same article:

          It has been argued that the definition is problematic because it depends on the location of the body: if a Mars-sized body were discovered in the inner Oort cloud, it would not have enough mass to clear out a neighbourhood that size and meet criterion 3. The requirement for hydrostatic equilibrium (criterion 2) is also universally treated loosely as simply a requirement for roundedness; Mercury is not actually in hydrostatic equilibrium, but is explicitly included by the IAU definition as a planet