No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
view the rest of the comments
Its semantics, and a subject of ongoing debate.
Per wikipedia, I really like this proposal:
It basically means a planet should be big enough to consolidate all the stuff in its orbital area, not be part of an asteroid field. That makes sense to me.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarf_star
"Dwarf" stars are even more confusing, as it basically a synonym for "normal," as opposed to "giant" stars (which are relatively puffy and big for their mass/temperature), or more exotic stars. But the term is also used for special cases, like the relatively exotic white dwarfs (remnants of exploded stars with very strange properties, extreme density, and not "burning" like a star traditionally does), or "barely a star" brown dwarfs.
TL:DR: If an astronomer asks you to name something, you should say 'absolutely not.'
I'm absolutely naming something if I'm given the opportunity,
Planet Bob is not great but still way better than K-57743267.7654
I don't like the idea of actually requiring a clearing out of the orbit. Is this not including Trojan areas, because there will always be stuff there for any planet.
The phrase "clearing the neignborhood" doesn't mean the orbit is clear, it means the planet in question has gravitational dominance over anything in its orbit, so larger bodies are either captures as moons or removed via gravitational slingshot. This allows wanderers and other captured bodies.
The same astronomer (Margot) has remarked that gravitational dominance was clearer language, and it's interesting that I've found in many reputable sources like NASA where they've dumbed down this third rule to just clearing the orbit, which is NOT correct as I mentioned above.
As for anyone who ever pulls the "I think Pluto is a planet"...it is a planet, as a subclass with restrictions.
True, I suppose I though clearing the orbit sounded more colloquial, whereas gravitational dominance may not be as clear to some?
For instance, just wait until you get a load of what astronomers consider to be metals.
why would he use the term pi? That seems nuts.
Why would I turn down such an opportunity? I'm great at naming things.