jenbanim,
@jenbanim@mastodo.neoliber.al avatar
  • Higher magnitude stars are dimmer than lower magnitude ones
  • "Giant" and "dwarf" refer to brightness, not size
  • Population 3 stars formed before population 1 stars
  • Stars are given letters depending on their temperature, which are in order OBAFGKM
  • Planetary nebulae have nothing to do with planets

Does any field have worse terminology and units than ?

dutch_connection_uk,

@jenbanim

While we're at it, don't forget the way "ices" and "metals" are defined in astronomy.

I think in general this will be a feature of observational sciences where things get named by the people who first document them, who may not have any good idea of what those things actually are. So Zooology and Botany might be good things to look to to see things being named terribly.

Smoljaguar,
@Smoljaguar@spacey.space avatar

@jenbanim also dwarf planets and rogue planets not actually being planets despite having it in the name (yes I'm still salty)

jenbanim,
@jenbanim@mastodo.neoliber.al avatar

@Smoljaguar I'm willing to cut some slack in that case because "planet" isn't a category provided to us by nature in the same way that the brightness of a star is. It's a category that is fundamentally arbitrary

But yeah the naming still sucks

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • Astronomy
  • tester
  • magazineikmin
  • khanakhh
  • InstantRegret
  • thenastyranch
  • Youngstown
  • everett
  • mdbf
  • slotface
  • ngwrru68w68
  • DreamBathrooms
  • kavyap
  • osvaldo12
  • rosin
  • JUstTest
  • Durango
  • tacticalgear
  • modclub
  • cubers
  • GTA5RPClips
  • ethstaker
  • normalnudes
  • cisconetworking
  • Leos
  • megavids
  • provamag3
  • anitta
  • lostlight
  • All magazines