Talk:Outer space

Definition of interplanetary space

This page's current definition of interplanetary space implies that it comprises the entire gravitational extent of the Sun. This is not correct. NASA has defined interstellar space as the region beyond the heliopause, which is a thousandth the radius of the region of the Sun's gravitational dominance. Serendi^podous 08:57, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

The definition comes from the cited source: "The boundary between interplanetary space and interstellar space is known as the heliopause and is believed to be approximately 110 to 160 astronomical units (AU) from the Sun." The insertion, "influence of the galactic environment starts to dominate over the Sun", isn't cited and can probably be extracted. Praemonitus (talk) 13:58, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

The section would likely be improved by reversing the order of the first two paragraphs. (Solar gravity is important for interplanetary trajectories, but putting any discussion of gravitation in the first paragraph of the section misleads readers into assuming gravity might define the outer boundary of interstellar space. I surmise the current reference to gravity is trying to establish inner boundaries around the planets, largely because the ordering of the sections appears to be from near to far. (— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 03:52, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

I made some changes, please review. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:37, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Excellent rewrite. :) Serendi^podous 17:32, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

Decimal point for temperature

In the last sentence of lede paragraph addressing avg. temp - the converted celsius / fahrenheit values are rounded to the nearest integer. With 2.7K being so close to absolute zero, I think we might want to round it to the nearest 0.1 degrees instead. 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk} 07:14, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Undue weight

Per WP:UNDUE, I have concerns about the 'Space sustainability' and 'Participation' sections in that they include too much content that is not particularly significant to the primary topic. Both seem like they are here to address mostly non-neutral political and cultural concerns. At best they deserve maybe a sentence or two. Any thoughts? Praemonitus (talk) 15:29, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

I agree that 'Participation'. That section should be a summary of the entire content of Human presence in space, which is unfortunately full of junk itself. So I think a sentence in Outer space#Exploration would be due.

I disagree about Space sustainability. This article seems to be reasonable. While the compound noun is very puzzling it seems to be the term of use issues of garbage in space.

The TOC here is very confused IMO. Johnjbarton (talk) 21:43, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

In this context, I view the space debris content as a bit of a side bar topic since it's only relevant to near Earth. Praemonitus (talk) 22:54, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes, but isn't that true for "Earth orbit" ? Johnjbarton (talk) 01:22, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Table of contents

Suggestions for reorg

• Move Outer space#Exploration to the top of Outer space#Human access and rename the section to "Exploration".
• Move Outer space#Space sustainability under Exploration at the end of the new subsection.
• Condense Participation to a sentence or two in Exploration
• Move Outer space#Boundary to Outer space#Regions near the Earth; maybe merge. Some of Boundary belongs in Legal status, both can be cut since we have Space law.

Johnjbarton (talk) 21:53, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

The sections keep getting moved around by different editors, so I'm not surprised there's some accumulated issues. For the first bullet, Exploration used to be at the location you suggest but it got moved down by another editor. I'm okay with it there since science history sections usually get located after the science. The Boundary section should at least be somewhere above the Earth orbit section (since the order is from the Earth outward), and I disagree with a merge. Legal status is per WP:SUMMARY; it's appropriate coverage IMO. Praemonitus (talk) 22:50, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

So in your view Exploration and History of discovery are both History? What if we had

• History
  • Discovery
  • Exploration

Sure, whatever. Praemonitus (talk)

"Human access" seems like an odd topic title to me. Currently

• Human access
  • Effect on biology and human bodies
  • Boundary
  • Legal status
  • Participation
  • Earth orbit

I don't understand how this tallies up to Human access.

Well, people seem to like grouping topics, and that seems as good a name as any for that particular grouping. Those sections all have to do with elements of humananity reaching toward outer space. I.e. the physiological effect, where we go, who owns it/what are the legal rights, who can go there, and where do we start? Perhaps there's a better name? Praemonitus (talk) 09:49, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

In thinking about it a little more, perhaps the header needs a paragraph to tie the topics together? Something about humankind's burgeoning effort to reach for the stars has come with certain technological, physiological, legal, and moral obstacles that need to be overcome. Praemonitus (talk) 17:00, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes, if we can find a source for that. Though to be sure that heads away from the topic. In such an effort "outer space" just a stage, stuff between us and "the stars". Johnjbarton (talk) 17:29, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

In a sense, although outer space itself is the main obstacle, so it's still relevant. Praemonitus (talk) 22:26, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Paragraphs 3 5 and 6 of Boundary are about legal issues. So by merge I meant moving the legal aspects into "Legal status". Similarly the content of Boundary and of Earth orbit overlap Regions. Johnjbarton (talk) 01:19, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

I don't think its that easy. For example, paragraphs 3 and 4 should be kept together. Paragraph 6 leads naturally into the next section. I suppose the section could be called 'Transition', as in Transition to space, with the 'space' removed per MOS:SECTIONSTYLE. Praemonitus (talk) 09:49, 10 July 2026 (UTC)