As children we were taught that Jupiter revolved around the Sun. Technically we were deceived

If you are over 30 years old, you probably learned in school that there are nine planets that revolve around the Sun. Then you found out that there were eight, because suddenly Pluto lost its planet category and became a dwarf planet. As if all that were not enough, now I am here to tell you that Jupiter does not revolve around the Sun. Sometimes not even the Earth does. We have been deceived or, rather, we have been told everything quite simplified. It is not the center, but the barycenter. There is a lot of talk about the gravitational attraction that large objects exert on smaller ones. The Sun on the Earth, the Earth on the Moon, the Earth on the people who walk on it… However, smaller objects also exert a certain gravitational pull on larger ones. It is tiny, sometimes imperceptible, but it is there. Therefore, although it is the Sun that dominates the planets of the Solar Systemeach one of them also pulls a little bit of it. This means that the center around which they all rotate is not in the center of the Sun, but at a point slightly separated from it, known as the barycenter. To understand it better. All objects have a center of mass. Broadly speaking, it is the point where we assume that all its mass is concentrated. It does not mean that all the mass is there, but for practical purposes, when doing calculations, it is considered that that is where it is concentrated. Because of how external forces interact with the object, it is right at the center of mass where it is best kept in balance. For example, with an elongated object of homogeneous mass, such as a ruler, the center of mass will be its actual center. If we try to hold the ruler on a finger, the easiest thing to do is to place the finger right under its center. There it stays better in balance. On the other hand, in a hammer, where the heaviest thing is its end, its center of mass is there. In the case of the Solar System, the barycenter is the point where the mass of the system is concentrated. Logically, it is very close to the Sun, since 99.86% of the mass of the system corresponds only to the king star. However, there is influence from other masses, so it is a little far from the solar center. The case of Jupiter. If the Sun is 99.86% of the masses of the Solar System, Jupiter accounts for 70% of the remaining mass. Therefore, individually it is the one that deviates the center of gravity the most. This means that the barycenter around which both Jupiter and the Sun itself move is outside the solar surface. Jupiter does not revolve around the Sun, but around a point that does not even cross the sun. The case of the Earth and the Moon. In the case of the Earth and the Moon there is also a barycenter. The Earth is much larger than the Moon, but the Moon also has mass and exerts some power over it. For this reason, the barycenter is not right at the center of the Earth, but 5,000 kilometers from it. It is still within our planet, but not as centered as we usually think. Jupiter and the Sun are a more extreme case, which is why the center of gravity is completely outside the Sun. The Earth does revolve around the Sun…sometimes. The Earth is much smaller than the Sun. If they were alone in the Solar System, the center of gravity would be practically in the center of the Sun. But of course, they are not alone. All planets act on the point where that center of mass is located. And the thing is, it’s a center of mass that moves as these planets move. Something similar happens to what happens when all the sailors on a ship move around the deck. The ship’s center of mass can change. In the case of the Solar Systemthe most influential sailors are the gas giants. That is, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune. When these align, they pull the center of gravity outward and the Earth does not rotate around the Sun. In short, no, the planets do not rotate exactly around the Sun. But we are not going to get fancy explaining it at school either. Don’t feel like you’ve been fooled, they’ve just simplified it for you. Image | NASA | Martin Jediny (Wikimedia Commons) In Xataka | A planet has just disappeared: NASA’s Hubble telescope has captured a violent cosmic event that changes everything

In this map we can see the countries in which cannibalism is technically legal. It falls very short

He cannibalism It is one of the stars of horror cinema, but also of the most cases Morbose of serial murderers. Some of the most rugged (if you haven’t seen ‘Dahmer‘, in Netflix, it is very good) They have inspired films and series. And although we might think that it is illegal to be associated with serial killers And it may seem to us A prehistoric actwe would be wrong. At least, in much of the world. The act of eating the neighbor. Eate for each other It is something that has been present for millennia. Some societies enemies ate as supremacist actsreligious or simply to obtain nutrients. In other situations, it is the despair that leads us to cannibalism. Currently, we know that it is nonsense because We don’t have too many nutrients. Now, cannibalism continues to exist. It is associated with erotic fantasies that involve eating or being eaten as part of a sex Jeffrey Dahmer either DorĂ¡ngel Vargas They ate parts of their victims as an act of extreme possession and cannibal acts have also been performed as part of magical rites, such as Red Zwazulu-Natal dismantled in 2017 In South Africa. We have cannibalism stigmatized for a good reason, but a few years ago this Map by Reddit in which it was stated that there were countries in which cannibalism was legal. The image problem? Well, it falls very short. A mess. That cannibalism is technically legal in some places does not imply that it is … legal. And the keyword is “technically.” In them, and in many others, cannibalism is not explicitly prohibited by any specific law. Does not appear in the Criminal Code or in the Constitution and, For example in SpainWhen cannibalism is mentioned, it is done in the context of animal protection against cannibal practices of its species. But of course, although there is no explicit criminalization, the acts to be performed to eat human flesh do constitute a crime. The murder, the damage to the neighbor, the manipulation of human remains or the illegal exhumation are acts pursued by the law. Therefore, although we can think that there is a legal vacuum, if we want to eat the neighbor, we will have to make a crime that, usually, is persecuted. In fact, a Armin Meiwesthe ‘Canibal de Rotiburg’, He was condemned for homicidenot by cannibalism (the victim was supposedly consented, but died in the process). Legal vacuum. We entered an extremely rugged gray area here with two cases that were given in Europe not so long ago. In 2010, the Norwegian artist Alexander Selvik He ate himself. Specifically, he consumed remains of his hip extracted surgically to prepare a dish that ate as part of an artistic project. A year later, in the Netherlands, there were two television presenters who They ate fragments of their own flesh and on the other in a live program. Both cases were investigated, but since cannibalism is not a crime, as was under its will and no other crime were damaged by law, No charges were presented. What there was was a debate about ethics and the limits of art. Requests. Of course, sporadic movements have been given for politicians to study if it would be worth including cannibalism as a crime in itself. In Spain, although some voice has been manifested to legislate, no serious request has been recorded. In the United Kingdom, a citizen petition for cannibalism was included as a specific crime. After six months, the platform record 38 firms of the necessary 10,000. In the petition, they detailed the following: “Canibalism is potentially dangerous and we believe that it is a little ethical act that should constitute a crime, even if the person whose flesh and/or part of the body and/or organ is being consumed has given its consent. There should be a minimum mandatory penalty of five years in prison for committing said crime.” Asterisks. In Papua New Guinea has been mentioned as illegal Sometimes and in the Central African Republic It was missing due to social contexts such as war conflicts. It remains a gray area and that, in some cases, is an implicit activity in others that are considered punishable. For example, in Canada it is not typified as autonomous crime, but the Criminal Code sanctions “Any outrageous interference with a human body or human remains.” And then there is the case of the United States. Although a rule similar to the rest is followed in the country (there is no specific prohibition, but performing cannibalism implies acts that are crime), There is a state in which The law is mentioned cannibalism expressly, penalizing it With up to 14 years in jail. It doesn’t matter if consumed with or without consent and does not only imply direct consumption: in 2024 the law was modified so that it is also punished if another person is supplied. There is only something that would free you if you eat the neighbor in Idaho: that it is a case of extreme survival. It means that what it means (it has not been given the case, until now). Image | The XXVIII terror house of ‘The Simpsons‘ In Xataka | A person has made Media Spain hook the most horrendous crimes: Clara Tiscar and ‘Criminopathy’

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.