Numbered planets: what method?

[Ragitsu]

Good evening.

Occasionally, an episode of Star Trek (pick a series...any series) will feature a planet with a number, such as Tandaris IV or Rollion 2. Is there any rhyme or reason as to how a planet's position or "rank" is determined...or is this simply a narrative tool used to establish the breadth of the various fictional planetary systems?

 

[The Wormhole]

Typically the name is actually the name of the star of that particular system, and the number represents how many planets outward from the star that planet is. It would be like referring to Earth as Sol III for example.

 

[UssGlenn]

Sure, they are numbered from closest to the star out. Earth, for example, is Sol III.

Edit: Ninja'd

 

[F. King Daniel]

Typically the name is actually the name of the star of that particular system, and the number represents how many planets outward from the star that planet is. It would be like referring to Earth as Sol III for example.

Except it's not always like that. Can't think of any off the top of my head, but I know they haven't always done it "right"

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

Except it's not always like that. Can't think of any off the top of my head, but I know they haven't always done it "right"

I believe they screwed up numbering planets in the Ceti Alpha system once...

 

[Timelord79 (he/him)]

Compare to naming conventions in the real world, where the Star itself already has a number:
e.g. TRAPPIS 1, with 7 known planets designated b, c, d, e, f, g, h.
The a designation I believe is assigned to the star itself?

 

[at Quark's]

^ It seems in the real world system, numbering (lettering) is done according to the order of discovery. Seems convenient too, since otherwise you'd keep reassigning those letters in case you discover a new planet closer to the sun. But you might end up with an 'illogical' order within the system.

 

[Orphalesion]

Yeah, I think it's the usual science fiction system, where [Insert Name here] I is the closest to the star it shares the name, then it goes II, III, IV etc. depending on how many planets the system has.

Earth probably also has the designation "Sol III" in this system.

One thing that seems a bit of an odd outlier is the "Prime" designation (as in "Cardassia Prime" for example).
Either that means it's the planet closest to its star (as in Primus, the First One) or, in cases like Cardassia Prime I also always considered the posibility that it's named that way because it was the first planet the Cardassians lived on.

 

[The Wormhole]

Except it's not always like that. Can't think of any off the top of my head, but I know they haven't always done it "right"

Well, naturally this is Star Trek, there's obviously going to be an inconsistency somewhere.

 

[DonIago]

Yeah, I think it's the usual science fiction system, where [Insert Name here] I is the closest to the star it shares the name, then it goes II, III, IV etc. depending on how many planets the system has.

Earth probably also has the designation "Sol III" in this system.

One thing that seems a bit of an odd outlier is the "Prime" designation (as in "Cardassia Prime" for example).
Either that means it's the planet closest to its star (as in Primus, the First One) or, in cases like Cardassia Prime I also always considered the posibility that it's named that way because it was the first planet the Cardassians lived on.

"Prime" may be an informal but widely-used designation. Perhaps it's actually Cardassia IX or such, but since it's the Cardassian homeworld they call it Prime and everyone knows what they're referring to.

Just like how everyone calls Earth Earth, not Sol III.

 

[1001001]

Random Number Generator

 

[C.E. Evans]

I've long suspected that some planets may have more than one name--a "technical" name and a common name--and which one is used is totally arbitrary. Planet 40 Eridani A II might be on an old Earth star chart somewhere, but it may be commonly known simply as "Vulcan." Conversely, you can have a planet called Kaleb IV that keeps things simple. Then you can have a world that's referred to just as "Wrigley's Pleasure Planet" and no one thinks twice (or even once) about it.

 

[Farscape One]

There are also systems with multiple habitable planets, like Rigel.

I mention this because of Cardassia Prime. At least one other planet in their system, Cardassia IV, is inhabited. ("THE HOMECOMING", where Li Nalas and the other Bajorans were held.)

It's very possible that Cardassia Prime is the first planet closest to their sun, which would account for their love of the heat.

 

[Orphalesion]

There are also systems with multiple habitable planets, like Rigel.

I mention this because of Cardassia Prime. At least one other planet in their system, Cardassia IV, is inhabited. ("THE HOMECOMING", where Li Nalas and the other Bajorans were held.)

It's very possible that Cardassia Prime is the first planet closest to their sun, which would account for their love of the heat.

It wouldn't have to mean their planet is especially close to the star. Maybe they just lack the equivalent of a Mercury and Venus.

But taking stuff like habitable zones around stars into account a situation where Carassia Prime is the planet closest to the star while Cardassia IV is also habitable is unlikely. Especially since Cardassia IV wasn't a frozen hellhole.
Sure it looked barren, but some of the workers wore short sleeves and did not look like they were about to drop from hypothermia, so it makes it more likely to me that Cardassia Prime is technically "Cardassia III" and right next to Cardassia IV.

I know its not Star Trek, but in a space-empire themed game called Stellaris when you found the first colony in a new system, the game usually suggest the name "[Insert Star Name Here] Prime", regardless of what number the planet is. Maybe it just means it's the "prime planet" of the system?

 

[XCV330]

Except it's not always like that. Can't think of any off the top of my head, but I know they haven't always done it "right"

It can become a little weird when dealing with binary star sytems and circumbinary orbits, so they can get a break on that. And since most star systems ARE binary..

 

[BillJ]

Pick a name, pick a number. Not sure much more thought than that has ever gone into it.

 

[Oddish]

Regarding letters, I thought that a binary star system's components were designated A and B. That's why at the end of 2010, Jupiter goes from Sol V to Sol B.

Question is, what would dwarf planets like Pluto and Ceres be?

 

[Farscape One]

Side topic and note: I don't give a damn what anyone has done planet classifications, there are NINE planets in our system. Pluto IS a planet.

I grew up on that knowledge, and it is staying that way. How dare people having the balls to downgrade a planet?

 

[Oddish]

Side topic and note: I don't give a damn what anyone has done planet classifications, there are NINE planets in our system. Pluto IS a planet.

I grew up on that knowledge, and it is staying that way. How dare people having the balls to downgrade a planet?

Personally, I'm with you. If I were doing the numbering, Pluto would be Sol IX. So apply the question to Ceres, Eris, and our other little balls of rock which were never granted planet status in the first place.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Question is, what would dwarf planets like Pluto and Ceres be?

They'd likely just retain those names.