List of possible dwarf planets

Short description: none

Comparison of sizes, albedos, and colors of various large trans-Neptunian objects with diameters greater than 700 km (430 mi). The dark colored arcs represent uncertainties of the object's size.

The number of dwarf planets in the Solar System is unknown. Estimates have run as high as 200 in the Kuiper belt[1] and over 10,000 in the region beyond.[2] However, consideration of the surprisingly low densities of many large trans-Neptunian objects, as well as spectroscopic analysis of their surfaces, suggests that the number of dwarf planets may be much lower, perhaps only nine among bodies known so far.[3][4] The International Astronomical Union (IAU) defines dwarf planets as being in hydrostatic equilibrium, and notes six bodies in particular: Ceres in the inner Solar System and five in the trans-Neptunian region: Pluto, Eris, Haumea, Makemake, and Quaoar.[5] Only Pluto and Ceres have been confirmed to be in hydrostatic equilibrium, due to the results of the New Horizons and Dawn missions.[6] Eris is generally assumed to be a dwarf planet because it is similar in size to Pluto and even more massive. Haumea and Makemake were accepted as dwarf planets by the IAU for naming purposes and will keep their names if it turns out they are not dwarf planets. Smaller trans-Neptunian objects have been called dwarf planets if they appear to be solid bodies, which is a prerequisite for hydrostatic equilibrium: planetologists generally include at least Gonggong, Orcus, and Sedna. Quaoar was labelled as a dwarf planet in a 2022–2023 annual report, though it does not appear to be in hydrostatic equilibrium. In practice the requirement for hydrostatic equilibrium is often loosened to include all gravitationally rounded objects, even by the IAU, as otherwise Mercury would not be a planet.[citation needed]

## Contents

* 1 Limiting values
* 1.1 Assessment by Tancredi
* 1.2 Assessment by Brown
* 1.3 Assessment by Grundy et al.
* 1.4 Assessment by Emery et al.
* 2 Likeliest dwarf planets
* 2.1 Largest measured candidates
* 2.2 Brightest unmeasured candidates
* 3 See also
* 4 References
* 5 External links

## Limiting values

Calculation of the diameter of Ixion depends on the albedo (the fraction of light that it reflects). Current estimates are that the albedo is 11%, a bit under the midpoint of the range shown here and corresponding to a diameter of 700 km.[7]

Beside directly orbiting the Sun, the qualifying feature of a dwarf planet is that it have "sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid-body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape".[8][9][10] Current observations are generally insufficient for a direct determination as to whether a body meets this definition. Often the only clues for trans-Neptunian objects (TNO) is a crude estimate of their diameters and albedos. Icy satellites as large as 1,500 km in diameter have proven to not be in equilibrium, whereas dark objects in the outer solar system often have low densities that imply they are not even solid bodies, much less gravitationally controlled dwarf planets. Ceres, which has a significant amount of ice in its composition, is the only accepted dwarf planet in the asteroid belt, though there are unexplained anomalies.[11] 4 Vesta, the second-most-massive asteroid and one that is basaltic in composition, appears to have a fully differentiated interior and was therefore in equilibrium at some point in its history, but no longer is today.[12] The third-most massive object, 2 Pallas, has a somewhat irregular surface and is thought to have only a partially differentiated interior; it is also less icy than Ceres. Michael Brown has estimated that, because rocky objects such as Vesta are more rigid than icy objects, rocky objects below 900 kilometres (560 mi) in diameter may not be in hydrostatic equilibrium and thus not dwarf planets.[1] The two largest icy outer-belt asteroids 10 Hygiea and 704 Interamnia are close to equilibrium, but in Hygiea's case this may be a result of its disruption and the re-aggregation of its fragments, while Interamnia is now somewhat away from equilibrium due to impacts.[11][13]

Based on a comparison with the icy moons that have been visited by spacecraft, such as Mimas (round at 400 km in diameter) and Proteus (irregular at 420 km in diameter),[14] Brown estimated that an icy body relaxes into hydrostatic equilibrium at a diameter somewhere between 200 and 400 km.[1] However, after Brown and Tancredi made their calculations, better determination[by whom?] of their shapes showed that Mimas and the other mid-sized ellipsoidal moons of Saturn up to at least Iapetus (which, at 1,471 km in diameter, is approximately the same size as Haumea and Makemake) are no longer in hydrostatic equilibrium; they are also icier than TNOs are likely to be. They have equilibrium shapes that froze in place some time ago, and do not match the shapes that equilibrium bodies would have at their current rotation rates.[15] Thus Rhea, at 1528 km in diameter, is the smallest body for which gravitational measurements are consistent with current hydrostatic equilibrium. Ceres, at 950 km in diameter, is close to equilibrium, but some deviations from equilibrium shape remain unexplained.[16] Much larger objects, such as Earth's moon and the planet Mercury, are not near hydrostatic equilibrium today,[17][18][19] though the Moon is composed primarily of silicate rock and Mercury of metal (in contrast to most dwarf planet candidates, which are ice and rock). Saturn's moons may have been subject to a thermal history that would have produced equilibrium-like shapes in bodies too small for gravity alone to do so. Thus, at present it is unknown whether any trans-Neptunian objects smaller than Pluto and Eris are in hydrostatic equilibrium.[3] Nonetheless, it does not matter in practice, because the precise statement of hydrostatic equilibrium in the definition is universally ignored in favour of roundness and solidity.[3][20]

The majority of mid-sized TNOs up to about 900–1000 km in diameter have significantly lower densities (~ 1.0–1.2 g/ml) than larger bodies such as Pluto (1.86 g/cm3). Brown had speculated that this was due to their composition, that they were almost entirely icy. However, Grundy et al.[3] point out that there is no known mechanism or evolutionary pathway for mid-sized bodies to be icy while both larger and smaller objects are partially rocky. They demonstrated that at the prevailing temperatures of the Kuiper Belt, water ice is strong enough to support open interior spaces (interstices) in objects of this size; they concluded that mid-size TNOs have low densities for the same reason that smaller objects do—because they have not compacted under self-gravity into fully solid objects, and thus the typical TNO smaller than 900–1000 km in diameter is (pending some other formative mechanism) unlikely to be a dwarf planet.

### Assessment by Tancredi

In 2010, Gonzalo Tancredi presented a report to the IAU evaluating a list of 46 trans-Neptunian candidates for dwarf planet status based on light-curve-amplitude analysis and a calculation that the object was more than 450 kilometres (280 mi) in diameter. Some diameters were measured, some were best-fit estimates, and others used an assumed albedo of 0.10 to calculate the diameter. Of these, he identified 15 as dwarf planets by his criteria (including the 4 accepted by the IAU), with another 9 being considered possible. To be cautious, he advised the IAU to "officially" accept as dwarf planets the top three: Sedna, Orcus, and Quaoar.[21] Although the IAU had anticipated Tancredi's recommendations, by late 2023 only Quaoar had been accepted.

### Assessment by Brown

Brown's categories  | Min. ⌀ | Number of objects

|
|

Nearly certain  | > 900 km  | 10
Highly likely  | 600–900 km  | 17 (27 total)
Likely  | 500–600 km  | 41 (68 total)
Probably  | 400–500 km  | 62 (130 total)
Possibly  | 200–400 km  | 611 (741 total)
Source: Mike Brown,[22] as of October 22, 2020

Mike Brown considers 130 trans-Neptunian bodies to be "probably" dwarf planets, ranked them by estimated size.[22] He does not consider asteroids, stating "in the asteroid belt Ceres, with a diameter of 900 km, is the only object large enough to be round."[22]

The terms for varying degrees of likelihood he split these into:

* Near certainty: diameter estimated/measured to be over 900 kilometres (560 mi). Sufficient confidence to say these must be in hydrostatic equilibrium, even if predominantly rocky. 10 objects as of 2020.
* Highly likely: diameter estimated/measured to be over 600 kilometres (370 mi). The size would have to be "grossly in error" or they would have to be primarily rocky to not be dwarf planets. 17 objects as of 2020.
* Likely: diameter estimated/measured to be over 500 kilometres (310 mi). Uncertainties in measurement mean that some of these will be significantly smaller and thus doubtful. 41 objects as of 2020.
* Probably: diameter estimated/measured to be over 400 kilometres (250 mi). Expected to be dwarf planets, if they are icy, and that figure is correct. 62 objects as of 2020.
* Possibly: diameter estimated/measured to be over 200 kilometres (120 mi). Icy moons transition from a round to irregular shape in the 200–400 km range, suggesting that the same figure holds true for KBOs. Thus, some of these objects could be dwarf planets. 611 objects as of 2020.
* Probably not: diameter estimated/measured to be under 200 km. No icy moon under 200 km is round, and the same may be true of KBOs. The estimated size of these objects would have to be in error for them to be dwarf planets.

Beside the five older accepted by the IAU plus Quaoar, the 'nearly certain' category includes Gonggong, Sedna, Orcus, Máni, and Salacia. Note that although Brown's site claims to be updated daily, these largest objects have not been updated since late 2013, and no objects have been added to the list since late 2020; indeed, the current best diameter estimates for Salacia and Máni are less than 900 km. (Orcus is just above the threshold.)[23]

### Assessment by Grundy et al.

TNO densities (vertical axis) plotted by increasing diameter (horizontal axis). As the diameter of TNOs increase, their density increases as well. Salacia's density is now thought to be higher, closer to that of Orcus.

Grundy et al. propose that dark, low-density TNOs in the size range of approximately 400–1000 km are transitional between smaller, porous (and thus low-density) bodies and larger, denser, brighter, and geologically differentiated planetary bodies (such as dwarf planets). Bodies in this size range should have begun to collapse the interstitial spaces left over from their formation, but not fully, leaving some residual porosity.[3]

Many TNOs in the size range of about 400–1000 km have oddly low densities, in the range of about 1.0–1.2 g/cm3, that are substantially less than those of dwarf planets such as Pluto, Eris and Ceres, which have densities closer to 2. Brown has suggested that large low-density bodies must be composed almost entirely of water ice since he presumed that bodies of this size would necessarily be solid. However, this leaves unexplained why TNOs both larger than 1,000 km and smaller than 400 km, and indeed comets, are composed of a substantial fraction of rock, leaving only this size range to be primarily icy. Experiments with water ice at the relevant pressures and temperatures suggest that substantial porosity could remain in this size range, and it is possible that adding rock to the mix would further increase resistance to collapsing into a solid body. Bodies with internal porosity remaining from their formation could be at best only partially differentiated, in their deep interiors (if a body had begun to collapse into a solid body, there should be evidence in the form of fault systems from when its surface contracted). The higher albedos of larger bodies are also evidence of full differentiation, as such bodies were presumably resurfaced with ice from their interiors. Grundy et al.[3] propose therefore that mid-size, low-density and low-albedo bodies such as Salacia, Varda, Gǃkúnǁʼhòmdímà, and Uni are not differentiated planetary bodies like Orcus, Quaoar, and Charon. The boundary between the two populations would appear to be in the range of about 900–1000 km, although Grundy et al. also suggest that 600–700 km might constitute an upper limit to retaining significant porosity.[3]

If Grundy et al.[3] are correct, then very few known bodies in the outer Solar System are likely to have compacted into fully solid bodies, and thus to possibly have become dwarf planets at some point in their past or to still be dwarf planets at present. Pluto–Charon, Eris, Haumea, Gonggong, Makemake, Quaoar, and Sedna are either known (Pluto) or strong candidates (the others). Orcus is again just above the threshold by size, though it is bright.

There are a number of smaller bodies, estimated to be between 700 and 900 km in diameter, for most of which not enough is known to apply these criteria. All of them are dark, mostly with albedos under 0.11, with brighter Chiminigagua (0.18) an exception; this suggests that they are not dwarf planets. However, Salacia and Varda may be dense enough to at least be solid. If Salacia were spherical and had the same albedo as its moon, it would have a density of between 1.4 and 1.6 g/cm3, calculated a few months after Grundy et al.'s initial assessment, though still an albedo of only 0.04.[24] Varda might have a higher density of 1.78±0.06 g/cm3 (a lower density of 1.23±0.04 g/cm3 was considered possible though less probable), published the year after Grundy et al.'s initial assessment;[25] its albedo of 0.10 is close to Quaoar's.

### Assessment by Emery et al.

In 2023, Emery et al. wrote that near-infrared spectroscopy by the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) in 2022 suggests that Sedna, Gonggong and Quaoar internally melted and differentiated and are chemically evolved, like the larger dwarf planets Pluto, Eris, Haumea, and Makemake, but unlike smaller KBOs that were included in a parallel publication. This is because light hydrocarbons are present on their surfaces (e.g. ethane, acetylene, and ethylene), which implies that methane is continuously being resupplied, and that methane would likely come from internal geochemistry. On the other hand, the surfaces of Sedna, Gonggong and Quaoar have low abundances of CO and CO2, similar to Pluto, Eris and Makemake but in contrast to smaller bodies. This suggests that the threshold for dwarf planethood in the trans-Neptunian region is a diameter of ≈1000 km (thus including Pluto, Eris, Haumea, Makemake, Gonggong, Quaoar and possibly Sedna; Orcus was not addressed).[4]

## Likeliest dwarf planets

The acceptance criteria of the IAU are for naming purposes and are not a formal evaluation that a body is or is not a dwarf planet. In addition to Ceres and the four largest TNOs, which have been repeatedly characterized as dwarf planets by the IAU, Quaoar was called a dwarf planet in a 2022–2023 IAU annual report.[26] An IAU question-and-answer press release from 2006 was more specific: it estimated that objects with mass above 5×1020 kg and diameter greater than 800 km (800 km across) would "normally" be in hydrostatic equilibrium ("the shape ... would normally be determined by self-gravity"), but that "all borderline cases would need to be determined by observation."[27] This is close to Grundy et al.'s suggestion below for the approximate physical limit.

### Largest measured candidates

The following trans-Neptunian objects have measured diameters at least 600 kilometres (370 mi) to within measurement uncertainties; this was the threshold to be considered a "highly likely" dwarf planet in Brown's early assessment. Grundy et al. speculated that 600 km to 700 km diameter could represent "the upper limit to retain substantial internal pore space", and that objects around 900 km could have collapsed interiors but fail to completely differentiate.[3]

The two satellites of TNOs that surpass the 600-km threshold have also been included: Pluto's moon Charon and Eris' moon Dysnomia. Charon has been called a (binary) dwarf planet itself. The next-largest TNO moon is Orcus' moon Vanth at 442.5±10.2 km and a poorly constrained mass of (87±8)×1018 kg, with an albedo of about 8%.

Ceres, generally accepted as a dwarf planet, is added for comparison. Also added for comparison is Triton, which is thought to have been a dwarf planet in the Kuiper belt before it was captured by Neptune.

Bodies with very poorly known sizes (e.g. 2018 VG18 "Farout") have been gathered in the following section. Complicating the situation for poorly known bodies is that a body assumed to be a large single object might turn out to be a binary or ternary system of smaller objects, as Chiminigagua and Lempo turned out to be. A 2021 occultation of 2004 XR190 ("Buffy") found a chord of 560 km: if the body is approximately spherical, it is likely that the diameter is greater than 560 km, but if it is elongated, the volumetric diameter may well be less. Explanations and sources for the measured masses and diameters can be found in the corresponding articles linked in column "Designation" of the table.

* Bodies with a nominal estimated volumetric diameter over 900 km are bolded; they have general consensus as being dwarfs, per the previous section. Charon is also bolded, as it has sometimes been considered a possible dwarf in its own right; Triton is bolded as a former KBO that is still rounded and geologically active.
* Bodies with estimated diameter between 700 km and 900 km are in bold italic; most are borderline possibilities, but in most cases are too poorly known for much certainty. They tend to be dark, suggesting that they are not dwarf planets, but some might be dense enough to be fully solid bodies.
* Other bodies, having estimated diameters below 700 km, are unlikely to be dwarf planets on the basis of current evaluation, but may be transitional (partially compressed) bodies.
* A light-grey background indicates objects whose densities are believed to be higher than 1.5 g/cm3. Orcus and Sedna are on a medium-grey background due to uncertainties.
* Darkest of the three shades of grey indicates those bodies whose densities are believed to be lower than 1.5 g/cm3, and so if the data is correct cannot be dwarf planets.
* Satellites are on a pink background, as under the current definition a dwarf planet must directly orbit the Sun.

All of these categories are subject to change with further evidence.

Possible dwarf planets with measured sizes or masses
(satellites Triton, Charon, Dysnomia included for comparison)  Designation | provisional
designation  | H

[28][29]

| Geometric
albedo[lower-alpha 1] | Diameter
(km) | Method  | Mass[lower-alpha 2]
(1018 kg) | Density
(g/cm3) | moons  | Category  | ID'd as a dwarf

|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

Emery et al.[4] | Grundy et al.[3][24]
Neptune I Triton | N/A | −1.2 | 60% to 95% | 2707±2 | direct | 21389±28[30] | 2.061 |  | satellite of Neptune |  |
134340 Pluto | N/A | −0.45 | 49% to 66% | 2377±3 | direct | 13025±6[31] | 1.854±0.006 | 5 | 2:3 resonant |  |
136199 Eris | 2003 UB313 | −1.21 | 96% | 2326±12 | occultation | 16466±85 | 2.43±0.05 | 1 | SDO |  |
136108 Haumea | 2003 EL61 | 0.21 | 49% | 1559 | occultation | 3986±43 | ≈ 2.018 | 2 | classical |  |
136472 Makemake | 2005 FY9 | −0.21 | 83% | 1430±14[32] | occultation | 2690±200 | 1.76±0.17 | 1 | classical |  |
225088 Gonggong | 2007 OR10 | 1.86 | 14% | 1230±50 | thermal | 1750±70 | 1.74±0.16 | 1 | 3:10 resonant |  |
134340 Pluto I Charon | S/1978 P 1 | 1 | 20% to 50% | 1212±1 | direct | 1586±15 | 1.702±0.017 |  | satellite of Pluto |  |
50000 Quaoar | 2002 LM60 | 2.42 | 11% | 1098±2 | occultation | 1212±5 | 1.75±0.013 | 1 (2?) | classical |  |
1 Ceres | N/A | 3.33 | 9% | 939.4±0.2 | direct | 938.35±0.01 | 2.16±0.01 | 0[lower-alpha 3] | asteroid belt |  |
90482 Orcus | 2004 DW | 2.18 | 23% ± 2% | 910+50
−40 | thermal | 548±10 | 1.4±0.2 | 1 | 2:3 resonant  |  |
90377 Sedna | 2003 VB12 | 1.52 | 41% | 906+314
−258
(occult. chord 1025±135) | thermal |  |  | 0 | detached |  |
120347 Salacia | 2004 SB60 | 4.26 | 5% | 838±44[33] | thermal | 492±7 | 1.50±0.12 | 1 | classical |  |
307261 Máni | 2002 MS4 | 3.62 | 10% | 796±24 | occultation |  |  | 0 | classical  |  |
208996 Achlys | 2003 AZ84 | 3.77 | 11% | 772±12 | occultation |  | 0.87
(assuming HE) | 1 | 2:3 resonant |  |
55565 Aya | 2002 AW197 | 3.47 | 11% | 768+39
−38 | thermal |  |  | 0 | classical  |  |
174567 Varda | 2003 MW12 | 3.46 | 11% | 749±18 | occultation | 245±6 | 1.78±0.06? or
1.23±0.04?  | 1 | classical |  |
532037 Chiminigagua | 2013 FY27 | 3.12 | 18% | 742+78
−83 | thermal | § |  | 1 | SDO  |  |
28978 Ixion | 2001 KX76 | 3.85 | 11% | 696.78+10.75
−8.87[7] | occultation |  |  | 0 | 2:3 resonant  |  |
90568 Goibniu | 2004 GV9 | 3.99 | 8% | 680±34 | thermal |  | 1.14–1.49
(assuming a Jacobi ellipsoid)[34] | 0 | classical  |  |
145452 Ritona | 2005 RN43 | 3.69 | 11% | 679+55
−73 | thermal |  |  | 0 | classical |  |
55637 Uni | 2002 UX25 | 3.85 | 12% | 659±38 | thermal | 125±3 | 0.82±0.11 | 1 | classical |  |
20000 Varuna | 2000 WR106 | 3.79 | 12% | 654+154
−102 | thermal |  | 0.992+0.086
−0.015
(assuming HE) | 0 (1?) | classical |  |
145451 Rumina | 2005 RM43 | 4.63 | 11% | 644 | occultation |  |  | 0 | SDO  |  |
229762 Gǃkúnǁʼhòmdímà | 2007 UK126 | 3.5 | 14% | 642±28 | occultation | 136±3 | 1.04±0.17 | 1 | SDO |  |
2014 UZ224 ("DeeDee") | 2014 UZ224 | 3.48 | 14% | 635+65
−72 | thermal | § |  | 0 | SDO  |  |
136199 Eris I Dysnomia | S/2005 (2003 UB313) 1 | 5.6 | 5±1% | 615+60
−50 | thermal | <140 | 0.7±0.5 |  | satellite of Eris  |  |
(303775) 2005 QU182 | 2005 QU182 | 3.75 | 13% | 584+155
−144 | thermal | § |  | 0 | SDO  |  |
78799 Xewioso | 2002 XW93 | 4.86 | 4% | 565+71
−73 | thermal |  |  | 0 | classical  |  |

1. ↑ The geometric albedo A is calculated from the measured absolute magnitude H and measured diameter D via the formula: A=(1329×10−H/5D)2. Ranges have been given for Triton, Pluto, and Charon, which have been observed up close and therefore have known local albedo variations.
2. ↑ This is the total system mass (including moons), except for Pluto, Haumea, and Orcus.
3. ↑ Dawn is an artificial satellite of Ceres

§ Chiminigagua was scheduled for imaging with the Hubble Space Telescope in late 2025 to establish the orbit of its moon, which should lead to an accurate measurement of its mass and density.[35] 2014 UZ224 ("DeeDee") and 2005 QU182 are scheduled for imaging with the Hubble Space Telescope in 2026, which may discover moons, which in turn could lead to a measurement of their mass and density.[36]

At the right of the table are evaluations by Emery et al.[4] and by Grundy et al.[3][24] Grundy et al. did not determine which bodies were dwarf planets, but rather which could not be. A red  marks objects that are not dense enough to be solid bodies. Emery et al. suggest that Sedna, Quaoar, and Gonggong went through internal melting, differentiation, and chemical evolution like the larger dwarf planets (green ), but that the smaller KBOs in a parallel paper did not (of which those listed in this table are marked ).[4] The question of current equilibrium was not addressed; this criterion is not generally taken seriously despite being in the official definition. (Mercury is round but known to be out of equilibrium;[37] it is universally considered as a planet according to the intent of the IAU and geophysical definitions, rather than to the letter.)[20] This would be relevant for Quaoar, as in 2024, Kiss et al. found that Quaoar has an ellipsoidal shape incompatible with hydrostatic equilibrium for its current spin. They hypothesised that Quaoar originally had a rapid rotation and was in hydrostatic equilibrium, but that its shape became "frozen in" and did not change as it spun down due to tidal forces from its moon Weywot.[38] If so, this would resemble the situation of Saturn's moon Iapetus, which is too oblate for its current spin.[39][40] Iapetus is generally still considered a planetary-mass moon nonetheless,[41] though not always.[42]

### Brightest unmeasured candidates

For objects without a measured size or mass, sizes can only be estimated by assuming an albedo. Most sub-dwarf objects are thought to be dark, because they have not been resurfaced; this means that they are also relatively large for their magnitudes. Below is a table for assumed albedos between 4% (the albedo of Salacia) and 20% (a value above which suggests resurfacing), and the sizes objects of those albedos would need to be (if round) to produce the observed absolute magnitude. Backgrounds are blue for >900 km and teal for >600 km.

Sizes in km calculated from assumed albedos[lower-alpha 1]
for brightest objects without measured size or mass  H  | Objects with this magnitude (H)[43] | Diameter of object at the bright end of this range, for an assumed albedo (p) of:

|
|

4% | 6% | 8% | 10% | 12% | 14% | 16% | 18% | 20%
3.60–3.69  | §2021 DR15 (H = 3.61 ± 0.15)[44] | 1,270  | 1,030  | 900  | 800  | 730  | 680  | 630  | 600  | 570
3.70–3.79  | §2017 OF201 (H = 3.72 ± 0.09)[45] | 1,210  | 990  | 860  | 770  | 700  | 650  | 610  | 570  | 540
3.80–3.89  | §2010 RF43, 2015 RR245, §2010 JO179, §2014 EZ51 | 1,160  | 940  | 820  | 730  | 670  | 620  | 580  | 540  | 520
3.90–3.99  | §2018 VG18 ("Farout"; H = 3.94 ± 0.52)[46] | 1,100  | 900  | 780  | 700  | 640  | 590  | 550  | 520  | 490
4.00–4.09  | 2010 KZ39, §2012 VP113 ("Biden"), §2021 LL37 (H = 4.09 ± 0.31)[47] | 1,050  | 860  | 750  | 670  | 610  | 560  | 530  | 500  | 470
4.10–4.19  | §2015 KH162, 2020 MK53 (lost; H = 4.12 ± 0.35)[48] | 1,010  | 820  | 710  | 640  | 580  | 540  | 500  | 470  | 450
4.20–4.29  | 2008 ST291, 2018 AG37 ("FarFarOut"; H = 4.22 ± 0.1),[49] §2013 FZ27, 2010 RE64 | 960  | 780  | 680  | 610  | 560  | 510  | 480  | 450  | 430
4.30–4.39  | §2014 WK509, §2015 BP519 ("Caju"), §2017 OF69, §2014 AN55, §2017 FO161, 2016 NY210 (H = 4.38 ± 0.74)[50] | 920  | 750  | 650  | 580  | 530  | 490  | 460  | 430  | 410
4.40–4.49  | §2014 WP509, §2013 XC26, 2007 JJ43, 2014 YA50 | 880  | 720  | 620  | 550  | 510  | 470  | 440  | 410  | 390
4.50–4.59  | §2010 FX86, 2010 OO127 | 840  | 680  | 590  | 530  | 480  | 450  | 420  | 390  | 370
4.60–4.69  | 2007 XV50, 2006 QH181, 2025 MZ348, 2014 OE394, 2002 WC19, §2014 HA200, §2014 US277, §2010 DN93 | 800  | 650  | 570  | 510  | 460  | 430  | 400  | 380  | 360
4.70–4.79  | §2014 BV64, 2014 FC69, §2015 BZ518, 2014 FC72, 2020 FY30 (H = 4.71 ± 0.16),[51] §2014 US224, §2015 AM281, 2010 VK201, §2014 TZ85 | 760  | 620  | 540  | 480  | 440  | 410  | 380  | 360  | 340
4.80–4.89  | §2011 WJ157, §2007 JH43, §2008 OG19, 2014 FT71, 1996 GQ21 | 730  | 600  | 520  | 460  | 420  | 390  | 360  | 340  | 330
4.90–4.99  | 2011 HP83, 2013 FS28, §2014 UM33, §2014 VU37, 2013 AT183, 2014 BZ57, §2014 JR80, §2003 UA414, §2011 OA60, §2013 SF106 (H = 4.96 ± 0.27)[52] | 700  | 570  | 490  | 440  | 400  | 370  | 350  | 330  | 310

1. ↑ The diameter can be calculated from the measured absolute magnitude H, and for an assumed albedo p, via the formula: D=1329×10−H/5p

§ This object is scheduled for imaging with the Hubble Space Telescope in 2026, which may determine if it has a moon or moons, which if found could enable a measurement of its mass.[36]

## See also

* Lists of astronomical objects
* List of trans-Neptunian objects
* List of Solar System objects by size
* List of gravitationally rounded objects of the Solar System
* List of former planets
* Planetary-mass moon

## References

1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Mike Brown. "The Dwarf Planets". http://web.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/dwarfplanets/.
2. ↑ Stern, Alan (24 August 2012). "The Kuiper Belt at 20: Paradigm Changes in Our Knowledge of the Solar System". http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/News-Center/PI-Perspectives.php?page=piPerspective_08_24_2012. "Today we know of more than a dozen dwarf planets in the solar system [and] it is estimated that the ultimate number of dwarf planets we will discover in the Kuiper Belt and beyond may well exceed 10,000."
3. ↑ 3.00 3.01 3.02 3.03 3.04 3.05 3.06 3.07 3.08 3.09 3.10 Grundy, W.M.; Noll, K.S.; Buie, M.W.; Benecchi, S.D.; Ragozzine, D.; Roe, H.G. (December 2019). "The mutual orbit, mass, and density of transneptunian binary Gǃkúnǁʼhòmdímà ((229762) 2007 UK126)". Icarus 334: 30–38. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2018.12.037. Bibcode: 2019Icar..334...30G. http://www2.lowell.edu/users/grundy/abstracts/preprints/2019.G-G.pdf.(229762)+2007+UK126)&rft.jtitle=Icarus&rft.aulast=Grundy&rft.aufirst=W.M.&rft.au=Grundy, W.M.&rft.au=Noll, K.S.&rft.au=Buie, M.W.&rft.au=Benecchi, S.D.&rft.au=Ragozzine, D.&rft.au=Roe, H.G.&rft.date=December+2019&rft.volume=334&rft.pages=30–38&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.icarus.2018.12.037&rft_id=info:bibcode/2019Icar..334...30G&rft_id=http://www2.lowell.edu/users/grundy/abstracts/preprints/2019.G-G.pdf&rfr_id=info:sid/en.wikibooks.org:Astronomy:List_of_possible_dwarf_planets">
4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Emery, J. P.; Wong, I.; Brunetto, R.; Cook, J. C.; Pinilla-Alonso, N.; Stansberry, J. A.; Holler, B. J.; Grundy, W. M. et al. (2024). "A Tale of 3 Dwarf Planets: Ices and Organics on Sedna, Gonggong, and Quaoar from JWST Spectroscopy". Icarus 414. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2024.116017. Bibcode: 2024Icar..41416017E.
5. ↑ Accepted in a 2022–2023 annual report
6. ↑ Greicius, Tony (2 August 2016). "What's Inside Ceres? New Findings from Gravity Data". NASA. https://www.nasa.gov/feature/jpl/what-s-inside-ceres-new-findings-from-gravity-data.
7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 Kilic, Y.Expression error: Unrecognized word "etal". (January 2026). "Constraining the size, shape, and albedo of the large Trans-Neptunian Object (28978) Ixion with multi-chord stellar occultations". Astronomy & Astrophysics forthcoming.
8. ↑ "IAU 2006 General Assembly: Result of the IAU Resolution votes". 24 August 2006. http://www.iau.org/iau0603.414.0.html.
9. ↑ "Dwarf Planets". http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/profile.cfm?Object=Dwarf&Display=OverviewLong.
10. ↑ "Plutoid chosen as name for Solar System objects like Pluto" (Press release). 11 June 2008. Archived from the original on 2 July 2011. Retrieved 15 June 2008.
11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 Vernazza, P. et al. (2020). "A basin-free spherical shape as an outcome of a giant impact on asteroid Hygiea". Nature Astronomy 273 (2): 136–141. doi:10.1038/s41550-019-0915-8. Bibcode: 2020NatAs...4..136V. https://www.eso.org/public/archives/releases/sciencepapers/eso1918/eso1918a.pdf. Retrieved 2019-10-28.
12. ↑ Savage, Don; Jones, Tammy; Villard, Ray (19 April 1995). "Asteroid or mini-planet? Hubble maps the ancient surface of Vesta". HubbleSite (Press release). News Release STScI-1995-20. Retrieved 17 October 2006.
13. ↑ Hanuš, J.; Vernazza, P.; Viikinkoski, M.; Ferrais, M.; Rambaux, N.; Podlewska-Gaca, E.; Drouard, A.; Jorda, L. et al. (2020). "(704) Interamnia: A transitional object between a dwarf planet and a typical irregular-shaped minor body". Astronomy & Astrophysics 633: A65. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936639. Bibcode: 2020A&A...633A..65H.
14. ↑ Karkoschka, Erich (2003). "Sizes, shapes, and albedos of the inner satellites of Neptune". Icarus 162 (2): 400–407. doi:10.1016/S0019-1035(03)00002-2. Bibcode: 2003Icar..162..400K.
15. ↑ "Iapetus' peerless equatorial ridge". http://www.planetary.org/blogs/emily-lakdawalla/2012/3389.html.
16. ↑ Raymond, C.; Castillo-Rogez, J.C.; Park, R.S.; Ermakov, A. et al. (September 2018). "Dawn Data Reveal Ceres' Complex Crustal Evolution". European Planetary Science Congress. 12. https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EPSC2018/EPSC2018-645-1.pdf. Retrieved 19 July 2020.
17. ↑ Garrick et al. (2014). "The tidal-rotational shape of the Moon and evidence for polar wander". Nature 512 (7513): 181–184. doi:10.1038/nature13639. PMID 25079322. Bibcode: 2014Natur.512..181G. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0012r6g6.
18. ↑ Balogh, A.; Ksanfomality, Leonid; Steiger, Rudolf von (23 February 2008). "Hydrostatic equilibrium of Mercury". Mercury. Springer Science & Business Media. p. 23. ISBN 9780387775395. https://books.google.com/books?id=QzXZs_xSLk4C&q=Hydrostatic+equilibrium+mercury&pg=PA23.
19. ↑ Perry, Mark E. et al. (September 2015). "The low-degree shape of Mercury". Geophysical Research Letters 42 (17): 6951–6958. doi:10.1002/2015GL065101. Bibcode: 2015GeoRL..42.6951P.
20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 Brown, Mike [@plutokiller]. "The real answer here is to not get too hung up on definitions, which I admit is hard when the IAU tries to make them sound official and clear, but, really, we all understand the intent of the hydrostatic equilibrium point, and the intent is clearly to include Merucry & the moon". https://twitter.com/plutokiller/status/1624127764969459713. Missing or empty `|date=` (help)
21. ↑ Tancredi, G. (2010). "Physical and dynamical characteristics of icy "dwarf planets" (plutoids)". Icy Bodies of the Solar System: Proceedings IAU Symposium No. 263, 2009 263: 173–185. doi:10.1017/S1743921310001717. Bibcode: 2010IAUS..263..173T.
22. ↑ 22.0 22.1 22.2 Michael E. Brown (13 September 2019). "How many dwarf planets are there in the outer solar system?". California Institute of Technology. http://web.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/dps.html.
23. ↑ How many dwarf planets are there in the outer solar system? (updates daily), updated 2013-11-01
24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 24.2 Grundy, W.M.; Noll, K.S.; Roe, H.G.; Buie, M.W.; Porter, S.B.; Parker, A.H. et al. (December 2019). "Mutual orbit orientations of transneptunian binaries". Icarus 334: 62–78. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2019.03.035. Bibcode: 2019Icar..334...62G. http://www2.lowell.edu/~grundy/abstracts/preprints/2019.TNB_orbits.pdf.
25. ↑ Souami, D.Expression error: Unrecognized word "etal". (August 2020). "A multi-chord stellar occultation by the large trans-Neptunian object (174567) Varda". Astronomy & Astrophysics 643: A125. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038526. Bibcode: 2020A&A...643A.125S.
26. ↑ ﻿Report of Division F "Planetary Systems and Astrobiology" Annual Report 2022-23﻿ (Report). International Astronomical Union. 2022–2023. https://www.iau.org/static/science/scientific_bodies/divisions/f/division-f-annual-report-2022-2023.pdf. Retrieved 16 May 2025.
27. ↑ "'Planet Definition' Questions & Answers Sheet". International Astronomical Union. August 24, 2006. https://www.iau.org/static/archives/releases/doc/iau0601_q_answers.doc.
28. ↑ "List Of Trans-Neptunian Objects". http://www.minorplanetcenter.net/iau/lists/t_tnos.html. Retrieved 15 July 2023.
29. ↑ "List Of Centaurs and Scattered-Disk Objects". http://www.minorplanetcenter.net/iau/lists/t_centaurs.html. Retrieved 15 July 2023.
30. ↑ Jacobson, R. A. (April 3, 2009). "The Orbits of the Neptunian Satellites and the Orientation of the Pole of Neptune". The Astronomical Journal 137 (5): 4322–4329. doi:10.1088/0004-6256/137/5/4322. Bibcode: 2009AJ....137.4322J.
31. ↑ Brozović, Marina; Jacobson, Robert A. (May 8, 2024). "Post-new-horizons Orbits and Masses for the Satellites of Pluto". The Astronomical Journal 167 (256): 256. doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad39f0. Bibcode: 2024AJ....167..256B.
32. ↑ M.E. Brown (2013). "On the size, shape, and density of dwarf planet Makemake". The Astrophysical Journal Letters 767 (1): L7(5pp). doi:10.1088/2041-8205/767/1/L7. Bibcode: 2013ApJ...767L...7B.
33. ↑ Kiss, Csaba; Gabányi, Krisztina; Moór, Attila; Müller, Thomas; Fernandez-Valenzuela, Estela; Moullet, Arielle (September 2025). "ALMA submm measurements of the trans-Neptunian binary system satellites Ilmarë, Actaea, Hi’iaka and Namaka". EPSC-DPS Joint Meeting 2025. 18. doi:10.5194/epsc-dps2025-905. https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EPSC-DPS2025/EPSC-DPS2025-905.html.
34. ↑ Dotto, E.; Perna, D.; Barucci, M. A.; Rossi, A.; de Bergh, C.; Doressoundiram, A. (November 2008). "Rotational properties of Centaurs and Trans-Neptunian Objects. Lightcurves and densities". Astronomy & Astrophysics 490 (2): 829–833. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:200809615. Bibcode: 2008A&A...490..829D.
35. ↑ Ragozzine, Darin (August 2025). "Probing the TNO Density Transition with Mid-Size 2013 FY27". Mikulski Archive for Space Telescopes (Space Telescope Science Institute): HST Proposal 18133. Cycle 33. https://www.stsci.edu/hst-program-info/download/hst/pdf/18133/. Retrieved 2025-08-16.
36. ↑ 36.0 36.1 Proudfoot, Benjamin (August 2025). "A Search For The Moons of Mid-Sized TNOs". Mikulski Archive for Space Telescopes (Space Telescope Science Institute): HST Proposal 18010. Cycle 33. https://www.stsci.edu/hst-program-info/download/hst/pdf/18010/. Retrieved 2025-08-17.
37. ↑ Sean Solomon, Larry Nittler & Brian Anderson, eds. (2018) Mercury: The View after MESSENGER. Cambridge Planetary Science series no. 21, Cambridge University Press. Chapter 3.
38. ↑ Kiss, C.Expression error: Unrecognized word "etal". (March 2024). "The visible and thermal light curve of the large Kuiper belt object (50000) Quaoar". Astronomy & Astrophysics 684: A50. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202348054. Bibcode: 2024A&A...684A..50K.
39. ↑ Cowen, R. (2007). Idiosyncratic Iapetus, Science News vol. 172, pp. 104–106. references
40. ↑ Thomas, P. C. (July 2010). "Sizes, shapes, and derived properties of the saturnian satellites after the Cassini nominal mission". Icarus 208 (1): 395–401. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2010.01.025. Bibcode: 2010Icar..208..395T. http://www.ciclops.org/media/sp/2011/6794_16344_0.pdf. Retrieved 2015-09-25.
41. ↑ Emily Lakdawalla et al., What Is A Planet? The Planetary Society, 21 April 2020
42. ↑ Chen, Jingjing; Kipping, David (2016). "Probabilistic Forecasting of the Masses and Radii of Other Worlds". The Astrophysical Journal 834 (1): 17. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/1/17. Bibcode: 2017ApJ...834...17C.
43. ↑ "MPC Database Search: H < 5.0 and a > 20 AU". Minor Planet Center. https://data.minorplanetcenter.net/db_search/show_by_properties?utf8=✓&semimajor_axis_min=20&semimajor_axis_max=&eccentricity_min=&eccentricity_max=&inclination_min=&inclination_max=&argument_of_perihelion_min=&argument_of_perihelion_max=&ascending_node_min=&ascending_node_max=&mean_anomaly_min=&mean_anomaly_max=&mean_daily_motion_min=&mean_daily_motion_max=&perihelion_distance_min=&perihelion_distance_max=&aphelion_distance_min=&aphelion_distance_max=&period_min=&period_max=&absolute_magnitude_min=&absolute_magnitude_max=5&orbit_uncertainty_min=&orbit_uncertainty_max=. Retrieved 2025-08-19. "118 trans-Neptunian objects brighter than H = 5.0"
44. ↑ "JPL Small-Body Database Browser: (2021 DR15)". Jet Propulsion Laboratory. https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/tools/sbdb_lookup.html#/?sstr=54231255. Retrieved 25 October 2022.
45. ↑ Cheng, Sihao; Li, Jiaxuan; Yang, Eritas (2026-02-03). "Discovery of a dwarf planet candidate in an extremely wide orbit: 2017 OF201". The Astrophysical Journal Letters 998 (1): L6. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae3a75. Bibcode: 2026ApJ...998L...6C.2017+OF201&rft.jtitle=The+Astrophysical+Journal+Letters&rft.aulast=Cheng&rft.aufirst=Sihao&rft.au=Cheng, Sihao&rft.au=Li, Jiaxuan&rft.au=Yang, Eritas&rft.date=2026-02-03&rft.volume=998&rft.issue=1&rft.pages=L6&rft_id=info:doi/10.3847/2041-8213/ae3a75&rft_id=info:bibcode/2026ApJ...998L...6C&rfr_id=info:sid/en.wikibooks.org:Astronomy:List_of_possible_dwarf_planets">
46. ↑ "JPL Small-Body Database Browser: (2018 VG18)". Jet Propulsion Laboratory. https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/sbdb.cgi?sstr=3836918.
47. ↑ "JPL Small-Body Database Browser: (2021 LL37)". Jet Propulsion Laboratory. https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/tools/sbdb_lookup.html#/?sstr=54281066. Retrieved 25 October 2022.
48. ↑ "JPL Small-Body Database Browser: (2020 MK53)". Jet Propulsion Laboratory. https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/tools/sbdb_lookup.html#/?sstr=2020 MK53.
49. ↑ "JPL Small-Body Database Browser: (2018 AG37)". Jet Propulsion Laboratory. https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/sbdb.cgi?sstr=54114199.
50. ↑ "JPL Small-Body Database Browser: (2016 NY210)". Jet Propulsion Laboratory. https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/tools/sbdb_lookup.html#/?sstr=2016 NY210.
51. ↑ "JPL Small-Body Database Browser: (2020 FY30)". Jet Propulsion Laboratory. https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/sbdb.cgi?sstr=54117580.
52. ↑ "JPL Small-Body Database Browser: (2013 SF106)". Jet Propulsion Laboratory. https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/tools/sbdb_lookup.html#/?sstr=2013 SF106.

## External links

* NASA JPL Small-Body Database Search Engine
* TNOs are cool public database, incl. diameters and albedos measured by Herschel and Spitzer to date, Herschel OT KP "TNOs are Cool: A Survey of the Transneptunian Region"
* How many dwarf planets are there in the outer solar system? (updates daily) (Mike Brown)
* Details on the dwarf planet size calculations (Mike Brown)
* Which are the Dwarfs in the Solar System? Tancredi, G.; Favre, S. Icarus, Volume 195, Issue 2, p. 851–862.

* v
* t
* e

Dwarf planets

* List of possible dwarf planets
* Former dwarf planets
* Phoebe
* Triton
* Vesta
* Mesoplanet
* Planemo

Asteroid belt|

| IAU|

* Ceres

|

Possible|

* Hygiea
* Interamnia

Centaurs|

| Possible|

* Ceto
* Chariklo
* Chiron
* 1995 SN55
* 2010 TY53

|

Plutinos|

| IAU|

* Pluto

|

Possible|

* Huya
* Ixion
* Orcus
* 2001 QF298
* 2002 VR128
* 2002 XV93
* 2003 AZ84
* 2003 UZ413
* 2003 VS2
* 2007 JH43

Twotinos|

| Possible|

* 2002 WC19

|

Cubewanos|

| IAU|

* Makemake

|

Possible|

* Altjira
* Chaos
* Praamzius
* Quaoar
* Rhadamanthus
* Salacia
* Sila–Nunam
* Varda
* Varuna
* 1998 SN165
* 2002 AW197
* 2002 CY248
* 2002 KX14
* 2002 MS4
* 2002 TX300
* 2002 UX25
* 2003 OP32
* 2003 QW90
* 2004 GV9
* 2004 NT33
* 2004 PF115
* 2004 TY364
* 2004 UX10
* 2005 RN43
* 2005 RR43
* 2005 UQ513
* 2007 JJ43
* 2010 FX86
* 2010 VR11

Scattered disc|

| IAU|

* Eris

|

Possible|

* Dziewanna
* Gǃkúnǁʼhòmdímà
* 1996 GQ21
* 1996 TL66
* 1999 CC158
* 2001 UR163
* 2002 TC302
* 2004 XA192
* 2005 QU182
* 2005 RM43
* 2006 QH181
* 2007 OR10
* 2008 OG19
* 2010 KZ39
* 2010 RE64
* 2010 RF43
* 2010 TJ
* 2010 VZ98
* 2012 HH2
* 2013 FY27
* 2018 VG18

Detached objects|

| Possible|

* 1995 TL8
* 2000 CR105
* 2003 FY128
* 2003 QX113
* 2004 VN112
* 2004 XR190
* 2005 TB190
* 2008 ST291
* 2010 GB174

|

Sednoids|

| Possible|

* Sedna
* 2015 TG387
* 2012 VP113

|

Other / unknown
resonances|

| IAU|

* Haumea

|

Possible|

* FarFarOut
* V774104
* 1999 CD158
* 1999 DE9
* 1999 KR16
* 2000 YW134
* 2001 YH140
* 2002 XW93
* 2010 VK201
* 2011 FW62
* 2011 GM27
* 2013 FZ27
* 2014 UM33

* Category

* v
* t
* e

Trans-Neptunian objects

TNO classes|

* Cubewanos
* Scattered-disc objects
* Detached objects
* Resonant objects
* Neptune trojans
* Plutinos
* Twotinos
* TNO moons

Dwarf planets (moons)|

* Pluto
* Charon
* Styx
* Nix
* Kerberos
* Hydra
* Haumea
* Namaka
* Hiʻiaka
* Makemake
* S/2015 (136472) 1
* Eris
* Dysnomia

Sednoids|

* 90377 Sedna
* 2012 VP113
* 2015 TG387

* v
* t
* e

Solar System

* Sun
* Mercury
* Venus
* Earth
* Mars
* Ceres
* Jupiter
* Saturn
* Uranus
* Neptune
* Pluto
* Haumea
* Makemake
* Eris

| Planets|

* Terrestrial planets
* Mercury
* Venus
* Earth
* Mars

* Giant planets
* Jupiter
* Saturn
* Uranus
* Neptune

* Dwarf planets
* Ceres
* Pluto
* Haumea
* Makemake
* Eris

|

Rings|

* Jovian
* Saturnian (Rhean)
* Charikloan
* Chironean
* Uranian
* Neptunian
* Haumean

Moons|

* Terrestrial
* Moon
* other near-Earth objects
* Martian
* Phobos
* Deimos
* Jovian
* Ganymede
* Callisto
* Io
* Europa
* all 79
* Saturnian
* Titan
* Rhea
* Iapetus
* Dione
* Tethys
* Enceladus
* Mimas
* Hyperion
* Phoebe
* all 82
* Uranian
* Titania
* Oberon
* Umbriel
* Ariel
* Miranda
* all 27
* Neptunian
* Triton
* Proteus
* Nereid
* all 14
* Plutonian
* Charon
* Nix
* Hydra
* Kerberos
* Styx
* Eridian
* Dysnomia
* Haumean
* Hiʻiaka
* Namaka
* Makemakean
* S/2015 (136472) 1

Exploration
(outline)|

* Colonization
* Discovery
* astronomy
* historical models
* timeline
* Human spaceflight
* space stations
* list
* Space probes
* timeline
* list

* Mercury
* Venus
* Moon
* mining
* Mars
* Ceres
* Asteroids
* mining
* Comets
* Jupiter
* Saturn
* Uranus
* Neptune
* Pluto
* Deep space

Hypothetical
objects|

* Fifth giant
* Nemesis
* Phaeton
* Planet Nine
* Planet V
* Planet X
* Theia
* Tyche
* Vulcan
* Vulcanoids
* Subsatellites

Lists|

* Comets
* Dwarf planets (possible)
* Gravitationally rounded objects
* Minor planets
* names
* Natural satellites
* Solar System models
* Solar System objects
* by size
* by discovery date

| Small Solar
System bodies|

* Comets
* Damocloids
* Meteoroids
* Minor planets
* moons
* Planetesimal

* Mercury-crossers
* Venus-crossers
* Venus trojans
* Near-Earth objects
* Earth-crossers
* Earth trojans
* Mars-crossers
* Mars trojans

* Asteroid belt
* Asteroids
* Ceres
* Pallas
* Juno
* Vesta
* first 1000
* families
* exceptional
* Kirkwood gap
* Main-belt comets

* Jupiter-crossers
* Jupiter trojans
* Centaurs
* Saturn-crossers
* Uranus-crossers
* Uranus trojans
* Neptune-crossers
* Neptune trojans
* Cis-Neptunian objects
* Trans-Neptunian objects

* Plutoids
* Kuiper belt
* Cubewanos
* Plutinos
* Detached objects
* Hills cloud
* Oort cloud
* Scattered disc
* Sednoids

|

Formation
and evolution|

* Accretion
* Accretion disk
* Asteroid belt
* Circumplanetary disk
* Circumstellar disc
* Circumstellar envelope
* Cosmic dust
* Debris disk
* Detached object
* Disrupted planet
* Excretion disk
* Exoplanetary Circumstellar Environments and Disk Explorer
* Exozodiacal dust
* Extraterrestrial materials
* Extraterrestrial sample curation
* Giant-impact hypothesis
* Gravitational collapse
* Hills cloud
* Interplanetary dust cloud
* Interplanetary medium
* Interplanetary space
* Interstellar cloud
* Interstellar dust
* Interstellar medium
* Interstellar space
* Kuiper belt
* List of interstellar and circumstellar molecules
* Merging stars
* Molecular cloud
* Nebular hypothesis
* Oort cloud
* Outer space
* Planetary migration
* Planetary system
* Planetesimal
* Planet formation
* Protoplanetary disk
* Ring system
* Rubble pile
* Sample-return mission
* Scattered disc
* Star formation

* Outline of the Solar System
*   *   *

Solar System → Local Interstellar Cloud → Local Bubble → Gould Belt → Orion Arm → Milky Way → Milky Way subgroup → Local Group → Local Sheet → Virgo Supercluster → Laniakea Supercluster → Observable universe → Universe
Each arrow (→) may be read as "within" or "part of".

0.00

(0 votes)

Original source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List of possible dwarf planets. Read more

|

Retrieved from "https://handwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Astronomy:List_of_possible_dwarf_planets&oldid=4390470"
*[v]: View this template
*[t]: Discuss this template
*[e]: Edit this template