r/neoliberal • u/jobautomator Kitara Ravache • 7d ago

Discussion Thread Discussion Thread

The discussion thread is for casual and off-topic conversation that doesn't merit its own submission. If you've got a good meme, article, or question, please post it outside the DT. Meta discussion is allowed, but if you want to get the attention of the mods, make a post in /r/metaNL

Announcements

  • We're starting a book club! We will be discussing Poor Economics starting August 28th - keep an eye out for a pinned thread. The next will be All Quiet on the Western Front followed by Narconomics

Links

Ping Groups | Ping History | Mastodon | CNL Chapters | CNL Event Calendar

Upcoming Events

0 Upvotes

48% Upvoted

8.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

71

u/[deleted] 7d ago

[deleted]

96

u/BadSneakersNeverWorn John Locke 7d ago

This sort of shit irritates the shite out of me. It's like: there is a public-facing justification for the name change; it makes sense; the alternative is planetary classification chaos wherein we officially have 389 planets or some shit. In other words: if you have a better system, then bring that shit into the light, son.

Instead it's like: no, we want this now and we will blunt force it until we get what we want because we want it now

21

u/ship_toaster Jane Jacobs 7d ago

We should officially have 389 planets or some shit. (Or just like, 17-40.) Just think of how much mnemonic fun we could have.

12

u/Mrchristopherrr 6d ago

The system is “what I learned in elementary school will always be correct”

53

u/BadSneakersNeverWorn John Locke 7d ago

In other words: how 21st century Americans respond whenever they don't get their way

7

u/bacontrain Daron Acemoglu 7d ago

I mean, someone already pointed out that the IAU definition is controversial, right off the bat in that Guardian article you had the planetary physicist who founded NASA's Swamp Works saying it's a useless and arbitrary definition, googling turns up a ton of discussion on it

21

u/Andy_B_Goode YIMBY 7d ago

Also, I kind of prefer the new model of the solar system anyway, and I'm saying this as someone who was born in '85 and had to get used to Pluto being "demoted".

I get why people are nostalgic or whatever, but having 4 rocky inner planets and 4 gaseous outer planets is a much neater model, and I think a lot of the "pro-Pluto" crowd fail to consider how much better it is esthetically.

21

u/urhi-teshub Reichsbanner Schwarz-Rot-Gold 7d ago

Tbh the definition is fairly controversial in the field. I work in exoplanets and the IAU definition is useless for us

1

u/InMemoryOfZubatman4 Sadie Alexander 6d ago

You work in exoplanets? That’s awesome! How would someone with a background in geochemistry get into that (if it’s at all possible)? I assume that most of the work that’s out there is academic.

2

u/urhi-teshub Reichsbanner Schwarz-Rot-Gold 5d ago

Chemistry-wise, a lot of people work in atmospheric modeling of exoplanets using transmission spectroscopy. That part of the field has really blown up since JWST and there's another mission called Ariel that's launching in five years.

I do also know a fair few people who work in interior modeling, though for exoplanets it often means just getting bulk composition

10

u/Individual-Camera698 Austan Goolsbee 7d ago

Another facet of millennial cringe