Talk:Chthonian planet

message: The article currently states that "Some scientists suggest that Mercury is a Chthonian planet due to its high density and metal-rich core", this seems like quite a bizarre view and I've certainly never heard of this theory of Solar System formation before. It needs to be stated who these some scientists are, so I've added a Citation needed tag to the sentence. --Hibernian 18:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bizarre, yes. As much as I know, the scientists believe that Neptune have an earth sized core of rock and other heavy stuff. If it is really believed, then the believers must believe that a lot of rock must have evaporated from the Jovian Mercury after the atmosphere was removed. The Sun must have been hot indeed! Or Mercury a very puny tiny little Jovian, if such can be imagined... Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 21:23, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I cannot find support for it on the Internet. It's probably some kind of confusion. Time to remove. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 21:57, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also keep in mind the scientists suspect that Mercury may have suffered a large impact that removed most of the outer layers... -- Kheider (talk) 13:37, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mercury a former Gas Giant? 

message: How about super-Neptune / eroded-Saturn HD 149026 b. Or is this article meant for Jupiter-class coreless planets? --Zimriel (talk) 23:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: HD 149026b does not really fit into the "chthonian planet" class - it still retains a large amount of hydrogen, which means it is not a "chthonian planet". Also is evaporation of HD 149026b confirmed observationally or just predicted theoretically? 86.171.72.213 (talk) 12:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: HD 149026 b

message: How about this planet: COROT-7b? This planet seems to be the first Chthonian planet discovered. Should we add it to this article? Maaf (talk) 02:44, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: COROT-7b

message: the article states that the planet is a hypothetical class, which means not proven in term of existence. Yet at the same time claim that there have been some such planets discovered. While the term "may be" infers uncertainty, from the way the sentence is styled it appears to be an uncertainty in terms of whether it is the first one discovered(as in other planets might be discovered earlier but not realized as such a planet) as opposed to whether it is actually such a planet. If it is indeed debatable whether the listed planets are Chthonian planets, the sentence needs to be worded better. If the planets are confirmed as Chthonian planet, then the hypothetical class statement needs to be removed.99.123.198.224 (talk) 22:05, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: internal conflict

message: Is it really a chthonian planet? Due to the presence of Kepler-10c, a 42-day period planet, I think it's not possible that Kepler-10b used to be a hot Jupiter as the shortest periods of an outer companion of a hot Jupiter are about 200 days. The shortest period hot Neptunes are also above the orbital periods of 1 day, especially among those orbiting Sun-like stars. The process for outer planets migrating inward (such as the case of planets around Kepler-70 also do not apply to this system. --Artman40 (talk) 13:22, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Kepler-10b