Is the Earth-Moon System a Double Planet or Planet and Satellite?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jbar18
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Moons Planets
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the classification of the Earth-Moon system, specifically whether it should be considered a double planet or a planet and its satellite. Participants explore the definitions of moons and planets, the role of the barycenter in these classifications, and implications for other celestial bodies.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the distinction between a moon and a planet can be based on the location of the barycenter; if it lies within one object, it is classified as a planet and moon, while if it lies outside, it is considered a double planet.
  • Others argue that according to the IAU definition, there are only eight planets in the universe, and objects orbiting other stars should be classified as exoplanets, not planets.
  • A later reply questions the necessity of strict definitions for the solar system, suggesting that the Earth-Moon system will always be classified as a planet and moon due to their mass difference.
  • Some participants express curiosity about future scenarios, such as the Moon receding and potentially affecting its classification, but assert that tidal locking will prevent the barycenter from migrating outside the Earth.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether the Earth-Moon system should be classified as a double planet or a planet and satellite, with multiple competing views remaining on the definitions and implications.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of moons and planets, the role of the barycenter, and the implications of future orbital changes that remain unresolved.

jbar18
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I was just wondering whether there is a proper difference between a moon and a planet. The only answer I've been able to find is that moons orbit planets, and planets orbit stars. But in reality, planets and moons both orbit their common centre of mass. So to frame my question clearly, would it be a planet with a moon if they were the same mass? Would they both be planets, both be moons or what? Kind of a pedantic question perhaps, but I couldn't find a clear answer.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
There is no clear definition. A possible distinction can be done based on the barycenter (the center of mass in the system): if it is within one object, you could call it planet and moon, otherwise it is more like a double planet.

With that definition, pluto and charon are a double-minor planet (or double-minor planets?), and all 8 planets in our solar system are planets - even Earth with its very large and distant moon.
 
mfb said:
There is no clear definition. A possible distinction can be done based on the barycenter (the center of mass in the system): if it is within one object, you could call it planet and moon, otherwise it is more like a double planet.
That is precisely the definition. It's important to remember that there are but eight planets in the entire universe per the IAU definition of the term "planet". Those things that orbit other stars: They aren't "planets". They're exoplanets.
 
D H said:
That is precisely the definition. It's important to remember that there are but eight planets in the entire universe per the IAU definition of the term "planet". Those things that orbit other stars: They aren't "planets". They're exoplanets.

Yes, but that's only from OUR frame of reference. From THEIR frame of reference, we are the exoplanets :smile:
 
D H said:
That is precisely the definition. It's important to remember that there are but eight planets in the entire universe per the IAU definition of the term "planet". Those things that orbit other stars: They aren't "planets". They're exoplanets.
For our solar system alone, such a rule is not necessary - the earth/moon system will stay planet&moon anyway (try to change that :D), and all other planets have a huge mass difference between planets and moons as Pluto is not a planet any more.

It will get more interesting for exoplanets as soon as exomoons are discovered.
 
mfb said:
For our solar system alone, such a rule is not necessary - the earth/moon system will stay planet&moon anyway (try to change that :D), and all other planets have a huge mass difference between planets and moons as Pluto is not a planet any more.
A rule is necessary. Is the Earth-Moon system a planet and satellite, or is it a double planet system? The IAU definition of a satellite is what says that the former is the case.

The Moon may eventually recede to the point where the Earth becomes tidally locked to the Moon. At this point, will our Moon have become something other than a moon? (i.e., will the barycenter eventually migrate to being outside the Earth?) The answer is no because tidal locking will occur when the Moon recedes by another 35%. The barycenter will remain inside the Earth.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
868
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K