Saturn has 128 new moons – more than the rest of the planets combined (www.newscientist.com)
from throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to astronomy@mander.xyz on 12 Mar 02:14
https://lemmy.nz/post/20291452

#astronomy

threaded - newest

grillgamesh@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 12 Mar 02:21 next collapse

Perhaps when they become fully operational battle stations?

troyunrau@lemmy.ca on 12 Mar 03:13 next collapse

This is a great question. It’s like asking when a rock is too small to be a planet. I suspect there were be a definition eventually that mirrors the planetary definition – something like “spherical(ish) and clears its orbit”. The issue is that Mars would lose its two moons under that definition.

So we might end up with something like “moons” vs “natural satellites” and Mars will just have to suck it up.

kinttach@lemm.ee on 12 Mar 03:33 collapse

Moons vs. dwarf moons? (Sounds like a fantasy novel series.)

pwnicholson@lemmy.world on 12 Mar 03:27 next collapse

*“Newly identified moons” I’m pretty sure they’ve been there for a while.

Having 128 new moons would really be noteworthy!

Zzyzx@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 12 Mar 08:11 next collapse

Jupiter excitedly pointing out this news to Juno

Bristingr@lemm.ee on 12 Mar 14:22 next collapse

What, having the best rings wasn’t good enough for Saturn? Gosh, how greedy. /s

otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 12 Mar 16:18 next collapse

Slut.

Try not to grab another moon on your way through the parking lot!

janus2@lemmy.zip on 12 Mar 18:02 collapse

“Did you bring enough to share with the whole class?”

the class: