Yeah, I was agreeing. I think the many argument doesn’t much water so to speak. I think the 0 argument has some merit depending on how you define a moon, but Trojans and quasi-moons definitely shouldn’t count since they aren’t relatively permanently. Problem is the IAU doesn’t have a good definition partly because many of the more detailed definitions that have been tried tend to disqualify our own moon and that would be way more disruptive than disqualifying Pluto as a planet which is still causing a mess in education.
I just find it a quite interesting subject that can only even be a subject because out technology has improved so much over my lifetime.
Yeah, I was agreeing. I think the many argument doesn’t much water so to speak. I think the 0 argument has some merit depending on how you define a moon, but Trojans and quasi-moons definitely shouldn’t count since they aren’t relatively permanently. Problem is the IAU doesn’t have a good definition partly because many of the more detailed definitions that have been tried tend to disqualify our own moon and that would be way more disruptive than disqualifying Pluto as a planet which is still causing a mess in education.
I just find it a quite interesting subject that can only even be a subject because out technology has improved so much over my lifetime.