Double planet arguing that Jupiter is a double star is "not" analogous to arguing Pluto-Charon is a double dwarf planet. The problem is that Jupiter is not even a star, or even a brown dwarf, and due to its low mass it is unable to achieve any form of fusion. Isaac Asimov suggested a distinction between planet–moon and double-planet structures based in part on what he called a "tug-of-war" value, which does not consider their relative sizes. This quantity is simply the ratio of the force exerted on the smaller body by the larger (primary) body to the force exerted on the
Ceres (dwarf planet) major planets was widely accepted, though a precise definition of "planet" was never formulated. The 2006 debate surrounding Pluto and what constitutes a planet led to Ceres being considered for reclassification as a planet. A proposal before the International Astronomical Union for the definition of a planet would have defined a planet as "a celestial body that (a) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid-body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (b) is in orbit around a star, and is neither a star nor a satellite of a planet". Had this resolution