[111212] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Are arabic numerals canon ?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alan Anderson)
Thu Sep 28 04:59:26 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
In-Reply-To: <28319f10-5a57-b519-6590-fec2819199c8@trimboli.name>
From: Alan Anderson <qunchuy@alcaco.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 16:17:11 -0400
To: Klingon language email discussion forum <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Cc: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
--===============4136158302565871528==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114f1b34551492055a317beb"
--001a114f1b34551492055a317beb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 3:59 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
> Klingons undoubtedly think Federation Standard is dumb for getting this
> all mixed up.
>
Star Trek's planet-naming scheme follows longstanding Science Fiction
convention, which arguably evolved organically rather than having been set
down with a strict definition.
In the real world, the pattern for labeling exoplanets is based on their
order of discovery and has nothing to do with the orbital distance from
their parent star. This is a relatively recent extension of the
International Astronomical Union's rules for multiple-star systems -- back
when Star Trek started calling things "Rigel 6" etc., no exoplanets had yet
been observed and there was not yet a need for a way to name them.
-- ghunchu'wI'
--001a114f1b34551492055a317beb
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On W=
ed, Sep 27, 2017 at 3:59 PM, SuStel <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto=
:sustel@trimboli.name" target=3D"_blank">sustel@trimboli.name</a>></span=
> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;bo=
rder-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
=20
=20
=20
<div text=3D"#000000" bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF"><span class=3D"">
<div class=3D"m_-7365560451680098247moz-cite-prefix">Klingons undoubted=
ly think
Federation Standard is dumb for getting this all mixed up.</div></spa=
n></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Star Trek's planet-naming sche=
me follows longstanding Science Fiction convention, which arguably evolved =
organically rather than having been set down with a strict definition.</div=
><div><br></div><div>In the real world, the pattern for labeling exoplanets=
is based on their order of discovery and has nothing to do with the orbita=
l distance from their parent star. This is a relatively recent extension of=
the International Astronomical Union's rules for multiple-star systems=
-- back when Star Trek started calling things "Rigel 6" etc., no=
exoplanets had yet been observed and there was not yet a need for a way to=
name them.<br><br>-- ghunchu'wI'</div></div></div></div>
--001a114f1b34551492055a317beb--
--===============4136158302565871528==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
--===============4136158302565871528==--
