Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dasilva
This is silly, [...]
|
It's not silly at all to try and define "planet" properly
within astronomy. No one says the colloquial definition has to follow, but scientists like to know what they're talking about when they say 'planet'. They like to be sure that if they use a word, say, in a publication, every other scientist on the world will unmistakably know what they are referring to. And that's not been clear at all (and isn't that clear now, as the article RLacey linked to shows). Of course it doesn't matter to us non-astronomers - or, well, doesn't have to.
There are a lot of "silly" definitions in science - where formal and colloquial usage of words stray from each other. Maths is a great example, particularily
the Peano axioms, which is a definition of "natural number"*. Maths is extreme in that because it doesn't observe anything real to come to conclusions, but is a science in itself, but sciences in general struggle with definitions for clarity within the field. Take the example of
species in biology. Yadda, yadda.
So, my point and suggestion to you is - pay no heed to the scientists, but don't ridicule them, either. They speak a different language, that only by pure coincidence occasionally sounds like english.
(I say this with love)
* Please bear with me whilst I check if I'm talking nonsense or not...
