Talk:Planetary system

Star system, stellar system, solar system, planetary system ...
Hello! I've noted recent statements about why this distinction has been so characterised; however (perhaps I'm missing this), I do not see any cited references (particularly from astronomical references) substantiating these distinctions. Please corroborate and verify. Thanks! E Pluribus Anthony 09:19, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

-

Hello again! Further to my prior request (unanswered) and after some digging, my search for authoritative definitions for some of these terms has born some fruit:


 * solar system - this is pretty clear-cut:


 * Solar System –  A group of celestial bodies comprising the Sun and the large number of bodies that are bound gravitationally to the Sun and revolve in approximately elliptical orbits around it....
 * — Collins Dictionary of Astronomy (ISBN 0-00-710297-6), p. 382
 * ''Solar System –  The collective name for the Sun and all the bodies that orbit it.  It includes the nine major planets and over 100 known satellites, plus countless asteroids, comets, and meteoroids....
 * — Oxford Dictionary of Astronomy (ISBN 0-19-860513-7), p. 420


 * stellar system –  "A gravitational system of stars."
 * — The McGraw Hill Dictionary of Astronomy (ISBN 0071410473), p. 125


 * This definition implies it can be correctly used for systems with more than one star, e.g., binary systems, with their constituents. Whether it can be used for one star alone and associated bodies is not wholly clear, in which case star system is likely more appropriate; however, a logical assumption can also be made that stellar, being an adjectival form of star (or stars, as per Oxford English Dictionary), can be used in a similar way to solar when referring to the Sun (Sol).


 * star system –  Strangely, I could not (yet) find printed references/definitions for this term; see solar system and stellar system


 * planetary system –  ... A system of celestial bodies in orbit around a star including planets, moons, asteroids, comets, and dust.
 * — The Universal Book of Astronomy, from the Andromeda Galaxy to the Zone of Avoidance (ISBN 0471265691), p. 394


 * ... A system of planets and other bodies, such as comets and meteroids, that orbits a star.   The Sun and its planetary system together comprise the solar system.
 * — Collins, p. 314


 * Note the distinction between solar and planetary system, viz. the Sun (or central star). This clearly does not include the central star(s) as part of the system, so references to the stars and their planets (in an extrasolar context, in toto) can more correctly be dubbed as star system or stellar system, and even improperly, as 'solar system' (e.g., as commonly referred to, like in Serenity).

In some respects, some of these clearly differ with definitions and interpretations already presented in the appropriate Wp articles. Based on this information and unless there are reputable opinions/citations to the contrary, I will be making these appropriate editions to the relevant articles. Thanks! E Pluribus Anthony 01:21, 6 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Adding to the above, well, somewhat, one sentence claims: "Our own planetary system, which contains Earth, together with the Sun comprise a unique star system: the solar system.". I'm pretty sure nobody can provide a proper source about our system being unique, at least more unique than any other. I suspect it was supposed to say it has a unique name, but so does the Alpha Centauri system. The solar system article's "Although the term "solar system" is frequently applied to other star systems and the planetary systems which may comprise them, it should strictly refer to our system specifically" is closer to the truth. I'll leave it be for now, considering the above critique. Retodon8 22:45, 14 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Why are you doing this research? People who write dictionaries have already done this. Betaneptune (talk) 18:24, 3 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Hey there; thanks for your note. I'm all for clarifying and editing thereof: the desired aim of the sentence you cited is to point out that (our) solar system is a unique star/stellar system amongst many, as "solar" should only be used when referring to the Sun and objects in its vicinity.  I guess there is a bit of duality in all of these terms: many stars may have planetary systems, but none precisely like ours (e.g., life as yet identified, etc.).  I'm sure there are a few citations that attest to that.  Make sense?


 * Besides: some of the lengthy discussions I've been involved in recently have had a similar effect as to receiving a shot in the solar plexus. :) Thoughts? Thanks!  E Pluribus Anthony 22:54, 14 November 2005 (UTC)


 * A star system or stellar system comprises 2 or more stars. Whether or not they have any planets orbiting them is irrelevant. Nurg 05:48, 1 October 2006 (UTC). (I retracted & deleted some further comments I made here.) Nurg 06:47, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

It makes no sense to call a solar system a planetary system. A planetary system is a system of planets. A solar system consists of a sun and everything within its influence, which includes planets, moons, asteroids, meteoroids, dwarf planets, Kuiper belt, Oort cloud, the solar wind, and perhaps other stuff I can't think of offhand. This is what dictionaries say (at least webster.com). Seems to me the only reason the term "planetary system" has even come into use is the discovery of "exoplanets". No one has ever called our solar system a planetary system until recently. Scientists studying exoplanets will talk about planetary systems because that is the planets that can now be seen! And it is they that constitute a planetary system, which is only part of a solar system. Stars are old hat. The focus on remote solar systems is their planets. Some will claim scientists call solar systems planetary systems, but they may well be referring only to the planets. There are videos of Neil deGrasse Tyson calling them solar systems. If one wishes to call solar systems planetary systems then ours should be called the solar planetary system. The article should be renamed "Solar system". Betaneptune (talk) 02:51, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
 * "a solar system" is incorrect; there is only one Solar System, and it has Sol (the Sun) at its centre. "a sun" is also incorrect; there is only one "Sun", which is a star. LordOfPens (talk) 05:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Adding a short rebuttal, as perhaps no one will read my long rebuttal!


 * [SHORT REBUTTAL]


 * So the argument is that using the term "solar system" to mean a solar system is "incorrect" because solar contains "sol" which is the "name" of our sun (a term nobody ever uses, BTW). But by the same reasoning, the term "planetary system" is incorrect because the term contains "planet", which means planets and not the rest of a solar system. So if "sol" limits the term solar system to our solar system, then by the same logic, planetary system limits the term to planets, and a solar system contains many objects other than planets. Who ultimately gets to decide this anyway?


 * Sorry. One more quickie: If you lived on a planet in another solar system, say around the star Deneb, would you use the terms sunrise and sunset or Deneb-rise and Deneb-set? "What time is Deneb-rise?" Doesn't sound too good.


 * [END OF SHORT REBUTTAL] Betaneptune (talk) 21:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

[SECOND SHORT REBUTTAL]

"Solar System" contains Sol, but "solar system" doesn't! So with caps, it's ours. Without caps, it's any! This should make everyone happy. Strict naming with strict logic.

[END OF SECOND SHORT REBUTTAL] Betaneptune (talk) 21:47, 6 May 2020 (UTC)


 * [BEGINNING OF LONG REBUTTAL] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Betaneptune (talk • contribs) 20:38, 6 May 2020 (UTC)


 * It is not incorrect. I've heard this argument before and it is bogus. Look in the dictionary. Is there only one solar plexus, too? Who is this lucky dude? Actually, by your logic there is no such thing as a solar plexus. webster.com 1b: a celestial body like the sun : STAR. If you think that's wrong then you should throw out your dictionary. (^_^) And no one uses the name Sol. Have you ever heard someone use it other than to claim it's the sun's name? (Both "the sun" and "our sun" are legitimate uses of the word sun. Words are flexible. They can have more than one meaning, and that meaning can vary with the context.)


 * If you're going to be so demanding of a name, that it represents only what's contained in the name itself, then a planetary system is a system of planets only. Think about it. Because solar contains Sol, we must limit it to our sun. But when the term planetary system is used to include a star, exoplanets, asteroids, meteoroids, comets, etc., somehow all of a sudden it's okay to use a name to mean something more than what the name says it is. This is inconsistent logic!


 * A solar system is so much more. It includes everything under the influence of its sun. Yes, "its sun" is a legitimate term here. I've seen sun and solar system used for other solar systems in respectable astronomy books and/or magazines and used by no less than Neil deGrasse Tyson. Look in the dictionary. Webster.com 1 b: a celestial body like the sun : STAR


 * If you can't have solar system because solar contains "Sol", then you can't call a solar system a planetary system because so-called planetary systems are really exoplanetary systems! And you also can't have planetary system because in this article it implies things other than planets. If you are going to be so literal about the "sol" in "solar system" then you should be equally literal about planetary system and define it as a system of planets and only planets. Meteoroids, asteroids, moons, comets, Kuiper objects and such are not planets. Therefore a planetary system, being a system of planets, doesn't contain them, and therefore is not a valid substitute for solar system.


 * I don't understand why dictionaries are to be ignored, or even declared to be wrong. We might as well throw them out if we think we are better than them. What about solar plexus? It has absolutely nothing to do with the sun, yet no one objects to its use in wikipedia. And what about planetary nebula? Why hasn't that been renamed? It has absolutely nothing to do with planets. Yet no one objects.


 * Again: for emphasis:
 * Using planetary system to mean solar system is wrong, because its very name implies only planets, which by your definition is wrong, even though it is clearly right; but we can't use solar system to mean a solar system, because sol is in solar. And since Sol is capitalized, why isn't it Solar system? And they're not planets; they're exoplanets. You could go all out and call them exoplanetary exosystems! (^_^)


 * You can't claim to be consistent when you certain logic to disregard a perfectly legitimate term and replace it with one which by the same logic is actually worse.


 * Dictionaries exist for a reason. There is no justification to choose one's favorite sense of a definition and rule out all others for reasons of inconsistently applied logic. (^_^)  Betaneptune (talk) 07:57, 22 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Here's a reference using the term "other solar systems". I have found that some sites call any star with planets and other orbiting bodies solar systems. I have also found some that limit it to our solar system. Again, if solar system has to be limited to our solar system because solar contains sol, then a planetary system has to, by the very same logic, be limited to planets, which doesn't include all the other bodies in a solar system. If we can't call them solar systems then we need a better term than planetary system.


 * https://www.britannica.com/science/solar-system/Studies-of-other-solar-systems

Betaneptune (talk) 08:49, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Planetary systems are star systems. They are the same things. https://vixra.org/pdf/1711.0206v5.pdf and here https://vixra.org/pdf/1205.0107v9.pdfAirpeka (talk) 13:51, 1 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I took a look and did a Cmd-F search for the terms. Nothing there says anything about this. In fact, by star systems in the first ref he seems to be talking about systems of stars. And he's only one random guy anyway. Neil deGrasse Tyson, e.g., at least some of the time calls other solar systems solar systems. Why is Wolynski to be preferred over Tyson?


 * Again, the same logic that purports to reject the term solar system actually rejects the term planetary system even more so. Planetary nebula has absolutely nothing to do with planets. But the discoverer thought it did. Now we're stuck with a bad name. We have a chance now to get it right, but people insist on "planetary system", which by its own words means only planets. A solar system also has meteoroids, asteroids, moons, solar wind, Kuiper belt, comets and such. And aren't they exoplanets? Why not call them exoplanetary systems? But I'm glad we don't. Betaneptune (talk) 14:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

The current name of the article is just as bad as what it should be, or why "planetary system" is a bad term
Sorry for starting a new section for this, but I am still awaiting a good reason for why "planetary system" is to be preferred over "solar system" for the title of this article. Both suffer from the same logic. Again: The supposed reason for preferring "planetary system" is that the term "solar system" contains "sol", and therefore applies only to our solar system. But I counter that the term "planetary system" contains "planet" and therefore can refer only to planets. Yet in this article it is being used to represent everything within the influence of a solar system's sun. Can someone please respond and explain why "planetary system" is to be preferred, given that it suffers from the same argument that "solar system" does? (Actually, if you want to nitpick to an even further degree, "solar system" contains "sol", whereas our sun is supposedly called "Sol". Note the difference in capitalization! Therefore, "solar system" it's a fine name for this article [any capitalization in the title being due only to the fact that it's a title, just like with any other ordinary word]). Betaneptune (talk) 18:35, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * If a solar system limits its name to our solar system because it contains "solar", then why doesn't planetary system limit its name to planets due to its containing "planet", when an actual solar system has many other types of objects? Still waiting! The argument fails. Betaneptune (talk) 12:38, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * All planetary systems are star systems. They are the same things. The terms "planet" and "star" are outdated by a couple thousand years. https://vixra.org/pdf/1711.0206v5.pdfAirpeka (talk) 13:39, 28 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Hmmm. Planets and stars are clearly not the same things. Outdated by 2000 years? Really? Are you serious? If star systems and planetary systems are the same thing, they are both wrong by the arguments I have already given. Anyway, you have not pointed out anything wrong with my argument. In fact, if those terms are outdated, you, too, think the article is badly named. Your link, BTW, comes up empty. Betaneptune (talk) 14:11, 7 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Hmmm. Someone changed the name of this section! Seems like an improper thing to do. I partly changed it back to what I think I originally called it. Anyway, I couldn't find what you claim in that reference. Outdated terms? You use them anyway!


 * What are we to call these things if not stars and planets? And it still does not address my objection, that the purported reason for rejecting the term "solar system" for solar systems also applies to the term "planetary system," but even more so. When I hear the term planetary system used in this manner, I think of a solar system with only planets in it. There is a big hole where the solar system's sun should be. When I hear the term solar system, I think of its planets, its sun (or star, if you prefer), and all the objects it contains.


 * Even if it is or becomes the accepted term, it is a dumb term. I'll just have to assign it to the set of other dumb terms, like "planetary nebula," which has nothing whatsoever to do with planets. It was mistakenly assigned to the things and only later found to be totally wrong. (At least a correction was made for what used to be called the Andromeda nebula.) But we have a chance to get it right this time, yet many insist on using the same logic they use to reject the term "solar system" that applies equally, if not even more so, to the term "planetary system." If someone can rebut that I'm all ears. I'm talking rebuttal to the logic, not the mentioning of random references.


 * Again, the only reason the term even came up is that the planets of other solar systems were the new things to be discovered. And when you study just them, it makes sense to call it that. Just like our planetary system consists of eight planets, and nothing more. Yet again: Many insist on using the same logic to reject the term "solar system" that applies equally, if not even more so, to the term "planetary system." And continuing with the logic, why are they not called exoplanetary systems, since it seems we need to call planets outside our solar system exoplanets?


 * I don't think the reference you gave should serve as the final word. It appears to be more of a rant than anything else.


 * People like to look for references here. The dictionary has already done that for you! That's the purpose of dictionaries. If you disagree then you should throw yours out!


 * From https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/solar%20system


 * ": the sun together with the group of celestial bodies that are held by its attraction and revolve around it
 * also : a similar system centered on another star"


 * Again, the dictionary people have already done the research for this, so people commenting here should stop wasting their time struggling to do the same.


 * Please don't feed the trolls. Especially when they look a lot like sockpuppets talking to themselves.  I'd delete this whole section if an IP hadn't posted here apparently in good faith.  Lithopsian (talk) 18:52, 1 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I don't know about the other commenters, but I am not a troll or a sock puppet. I have a legitimate point: The same argument about how the term solar system is bad applies even more so to the term planetary system. Short and sweet: If solar system can apply only to our solar system because it contains "Sol", then planetary system can apply only to planets because it contains "planet." So "solar system" is the better and more sensible term. I have yet to see a valid refutation of this. Therefore I suggest we rename this to "Solar System" or at least something other than "Planetary System."


 * There are many badly named terms. Here we have a chance to get it right.


 * Betaneptune (talk) 20:59, 1 April 2021 (UTC)


 * @Lithopsian - Please don't call me a troll. I have a perfectly legitimate argument. If you find fault with it, please do post. But evidently you can't find a legitimate argument against it. It's easy to call someone you don't like a troll. Or maybe you're doing it because you don't like my argument. And your evidence for such is pretty flimsy anyway -- esp. since it's wrong.


 * We had a chance to get this right, but the powers-that-be insist on doing it wrong as I have explained above. It's like when people use Latin plural suffixes where they really don't apply in an effort to look "smart." That's what this is.


 * So "planetary system" needlessly joins the ranks of other badly named things: planetary nebula, perpetual motion machine, solar plexus, space quantization, and I'm sure more I can't think of offhand. Oh, some claim electromotive force is badly named. But it's too late to fix those. At least merriam-webster agrees with me. I'd trust them over Wikipedia any day of the week.


 * If it appears I'm talking to myself, it is only because no one can come up with a good counterargument. I'm all ears if anyone has one. But no, no one does. Because there is none. Go ahead. Keep the clearly misleading name. The needlessly wrong name. So be it. Betaneptune (talk) 14:04, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Edge of a solar system
I think this is a notable topic. For now I've redirected this to Solar System, since the article here doesn't discuss it at all, but in the long run this should have a section here (if not its own, stand alone article). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:15, 7 February 2022 (UTC)