In the modern definitions, no. A planet is an object which is not a star, in orbit around a star. A star is an object where there is (or was or could have been) nuclear fusion going on inside of it.
In the very old definitions (going back to the Greeks, over 2000 years ago),
an "aster" was any object that was in the sky, beyond Earth's atmosphere. Therefore, any object that was way out there was an "aster" including the Sun, the Moon, the planets, the fixed stars, comets, etc.
However, "meteors" were already known to be objects inside the atmosphere (the word meteor is from the same root that gives us the word meteorology, the study of the atmosphere)
Some of the objects were seen to be moving, they were called... "stars that move" (aster planetes); this is where we got the word planet.
Some of the objects looked like they had hair growing when they approached the Sun. They were called ... "stars with hair" (aster cometes); we got the word comet.
And so on.
So, if you go back 2000 years, the answer to your question would be yes, because anything "out there" was called a star.
In the very old definitions (going back to the Greeks, over 2000 years ago),
an "aster" was any object that was in the sky, beyond Earth's atmosphere. Therefore, any object that was way out there was an "aster" including the Sun, the Moon, the planets, the fixed stars, comets, etc.
However, "meteors" were already known to be objects inside the atmosphere (the word meteor is from the same root that gives us the word meteorology, the study of the atmosphere)
Some of the objects were seen to be moving, they were called... "stars that move" (aster planetes); this is where we got the word planet.
Some of the objects looked like they had hair growing when they approached the Sun. They were called ... "stars with hair" (aster cometes); we got the word comet.
And so on.
So, if you go back 2000 years, the answer to your question would be yes, because anything "out there" was called a star.
-
Planets are not stars. Planets do not have enough mass to have nuclear fusion reactions going on in their cores like stars do. A brown dwarf star is kind of a half planet half star. There's enough mass and pressure at the core for thermonuclear fusion to start and go on for several thousand years, but there is not enough mass or pressure to maintain nuclear fusion reactions for millions to billions of years.
-
No. What the first guy said is correct. Stars use fusion, planets do not. If Jupiter were any bigger, however, it could produce fusion and become a star.
-
Planets are not stars. Stars use nuclear fusion to produce energy (heat, light, etc.). Planets on the other hand do not. Also planets have a smaller mass than stars.
-
stars has a nuclear reactor in the core but planets dont. stars are also made of gases and gives off intense heat and light where planets orbit around stars
-
Planets are not stars. Stars are burning balls of gas, whereas planets are not. why are you asking this? you're on the internet!
-
Planets is not stars. Stars is stars, 'cause that's what they is.