Tomato is not a celestial body, it is a species and there exist very valid definitions for what makes a species and when something becomes a sub-species or a species of their own. With species, as science has advanced we've had to redefine previous classifications, change assumptions and replace certain explanations with new ones that better support current findings. Where a line is drawn in various astronomical classifications has no value. If gas planets were classified as "Superduper planets" and Earth was classified "blue class" they have zero impact on what those objects are like - as you're actually saying. Tomato stays a tomato whether we call it fruit or veggie. The same is that Pluto has all it's characteristics and attributes whatever we call it. This is exactly why I don't understand the fuss about changing the classification. Pluto, even if we classified it as "rock" or "pile of rocks" is still for a lot of us a lot more interesting than Neptune or some other gas giant in itself. Without their satellites imho gas giants are really rather boring in the family of celestial objects. I was merely observing what motivation he has because motivation is important. For instance if I'm motivated by being frustrated and angry, I will likely forever find something to nitpick on or at least keep on going until I manage to find something or pretend to misunderstand something in order to be able to complain about it. Similarly if a person is motivated by nostalgia and sentiment or misplaced empathy towards some object and it's classification - things that don't mean a single thing and don't have any value to them whatsoever, then they will operate in a similar manner, never yielding and always rallying and regrouping for a new attack. That's surface gravity. Tiny objects have relatively higher surface gravity because the distance from the center of mass is significantly lower but I agree with you, for practicality's sake it would be good to simply define a mass or gravity threshold. I think I would be certifiably crazy if I were once fully honest in a psych test. But it's really pointless. "I challenge your definition of foot!" Pointless and counter-productive. It is possible sometimes to convince people to start considering a change of classification or definition. Then it can be discussed at length and a decision can be reached whether to or not to change. However, in the meanwhile it is appropriate that people work with the definitions that we have, especially if there's no real impact from the definitions. In cases such as astronomy and engineering etc. the definitions just exist so that when we talk about the things we all have same set of definitions for lengths, durations, weights etc. and which objects we call stars, planets, dwarf planets, asteroids, moons etc. because it makes everything more easy. No one is ever saying "I think it's unfair that my favorite asteroid is classified as asteroid, it should be a planet or at least a dwarf-planet", makes no sense. You don't even need to say "settle with it being the most interesting asteroid". You can just say "it's the most interesting celestial object".
point being, everyone's definition is different regardless of what people agree on, even if I agreed with the current definition, in the boundless fields of space there's bound to be another celestial body that would bring this vague point under scrutiny once again, so why leave it in such vaguely defined syntax? I don't consider it pointless, though it can be counter-productive in certain circumstances, we're constantly redefining our own definitions, to help us better understand our reality, the conflict only comes into being when you choose to share your own definition with others. Of course the ability to share is limited by language etc... so compromises are always made, etc... but when it comes right down to it, even if you say it's a dwarf planet, I'm still going to call it a planet, because I'm lazy and saying 'dwarf planet' every time I decide to talk about Pluto is just one more syllable I don't really need to get the point across XD.
Pluto's coming to give us a hug. On planetary scale. Due to the masses involved no one will survive and the hug's effects will ripple across entire solar system in the form of countless asteroids.
