Debate why this is wrong.
>>8105208
Because the planets have elliptical orbits?
>>8105216
there are a few more
>>8105208
You're missing Pluto
>>8105208
Neptune's orbital period isn't evenly divisible by Mercury's orbital period, etc.
Scale way wrong.
Pluto missing.
They have different angular acceleration
>>8105222
Science says Pluto's not a planet, and I disagree.
>>8105208
>Debate why this is wrong.
It's not.
It's clearly not intended to be a realistic image of the solar system, it's simply an illustration.
>>8105567
Shut up Jerry.
>>8105208
It's not "wrong' as a simplified illustration, but it's not correct in scale or geometry. With a sun this scale, Earth would be about where Uranus is represented, and most planets, except arguably Venus, would have a far more elliptical orbit.
>>8105593
My man!
>>8105602
Earth would also be a barely visible speck of color.
>>8105208
None of this is to scale, and where is planet X?
>>8105614
Every object, before it is named, has been known as "object x". Pluto was "planet x". "X" is not an actual given name of an object, but a placeholder. This is why, if you ask an astrophysicist about "planet x", he will look at you funny.
The long pieces of string depicted have never actually been observed.
the planets align much less often than every 6 years
>>8105208
Neptune has 1/6 of earth's progress, Uranus has 2/6 and so on. In reality Neptune takes 165 years
Most of the planets are tidally locked to the sun
Saturn isn't
The inverse square law causes the geometry of the space curve to be an ellipse, not a circle. Velocity is also likely not constant. In fact, I imagine as the debris pulled into planets a long time ago, it was the distance from the sun and its gravitational acceleration that were the initial parameters leaving the velocity to be determined afterwards. I'm just talking out of my ass on that last point though.
>>8105208
The sun is too small
>>8105208
It's a correct projection of the solar system on to a deformed oblate spheroid's surface that has alternating signs of guassian curvature.
>>8105208
>heliocentric model
>the sun is not white
>not to scale
>sun is center of gravity of the SS and not wobbling
>no gravitational lensing
>planets are on the same plane
>accelerating planets
>these random stars do not exist
>no asteroid belt
>skyglow around the sun
>unnatural colors
>tfw no one mentions the orbital precession of Mercury's perihelion
pic related
1. planets arent proportional
2. elliptical orbits not circular
3. the sun should be traveling through space, it should look like a vortex
4. missing moons
idk i feel like there's a lot more but im just pointing out the obvious ones
>>8108703
The Sun travelling in space is the best meme. It's impossible to make a good representation where the Sun movement around the galaxy is noticeable (along with the planets).
>>8108733
>mfw the Milky Way is also moving
>>8108737
>mfw when the virgo supercluster is also moving
>>8105235
No, the angular acceleration of all the planets is 0. If not keplers 2cd wouldn't work.
>>8108733
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0jHsq36_NTU
>>8105208
Orbits are never really circularly, usually elliptical
the gravity of the planets on each other isn't represented correctly
geocentric/heliocentric models are incorrect
>what is a barycentre
>>8110502
http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/03/04/vortex_motion_viral_video_showing_sun_s_motion_through_galaxy_is_wrong.html
Google protoplanetary disk
>>8108431
siick
>>8108770
GAAAAAAH !!!! Latakia Supercluster. Latakia NOT Virgo. (And yes there are a HUGE percent of incorrect wiki pages).
Our cluster was reclassified and named due to observed rotation around 'The Great Attractor'.
>>8111695
L a n i a k e a (phone auto-complete).
>>8111708
Yes, the Laniakea Supercluster, the one in which we reside.
I find it one of the most beautiful names in science, even if the word "Laniakea" didn't mean "immeasurable heavens" in Hawaiian.
