New Planets definition

Personally I'd like to see Pluto recalssified as a KBO but given honourary planet status for historical reasons.
That means 8 proper planets and 1 special exception, making it a rule. :D
 
My proposal is eight classical planets. Trans-Neptunian bodies are mainly Kuiper Belt objects, some are comets from the Oort Cloud. Ceres is an asteroid and should stay as such. Not massively impressed with recent official suggestions.
 
Sounds about right to me. Not the biggest Kupier belt object, gravitationally insignificant, eccentric orbit. I've always been for downgrading Pluto - otherwise it wouldn't make sense to call every comparable-sized KBO a planet too, and god knows how may of them there are.

EDIT: Oh no, just had a thought - what are we going to do about "My Very Easy Method, Just Speeds Up Naming Planets"? Just get rid of the last "Planet" (appropriately)?
 
Last edited:
firewallblocked said:
It's now offical PLUTO is no longer a planet! I'm sure chaos will follow. :D
Click to expand...


Nah just american schools refusing to teach that pluto is anything other than a planet, cos its the only 1 discovered by an american.
 
By stripping Pluto of the "planet" status only confuses things. Parents and grand parents would now have to teach their children and grandchildren respectfully, that they got taught Pluto was a planet and now it isn't which means they have to explain why it isn't a planet which they won't know*!

However, taking into consideration that at one time one of Jupiters moons was considered a planet for a short period of time only puts the IAU into more stress on a defination of a planet.




*May not be true. They may be astronomers!
 
Don't you worry! When I have colonised it with my robot drone miners to exploit its rich mineral resources, I shall declare it an autonomous planet and let the astronomers go hang!

Currently interviewing for the position of Planetary Minister of the Environment with special responsibility for strip-mining and detonations. CVs to my trust email please!
 
well there is another object in our solar system that was always thought of as smaller than pulto but last year it was realised that it was bigger then pulto although this other object (does have some weird name like x225 or aomething but can't remeber it) was never classed as a planet so it was either make this thing a planet or stop calling pulto a planet
 
The way I see it, 2500 astronomers gathered and made this decision. That's more people than, out of the general population, realise there's more than just planet Earth in our solar system anyway! :p
 
badgermonkey said:
Why's everyone refferring to the circularity of the orbit? EVERY object that orbits a star, following the basic laws of the universe and is an ellipse.
Click to expand...

Of course it is, as stated by Kepler's first law of planetary motion. The point is that Pluto, however, is at a much more eccentric orbit that the other 8. The new definition means that because it crosses the path of Neptune, it is automatically relegated to a "dwarf planet".
 
Last edited:
Spend_day said:
x225 or aomething but can't remeber it) was never classed as a planet so it was either make this thing a planet or stop calling pulto a planet
Click to expand...
Ah, yes, the one codenamed "Xena" :rolleyes: :p
They did say if it were classified as a planet it would have to be renamed after one of the ancient Greek/Roman gods though, so maybe the guy who found it didn't want it reclassified so it could keep the name he gave it :p
 
Memphis said:
So in schools, is it just gonna be "My Very Easy Method Just Speeds Up Naming..." :confused: ;) ?
Click to expand...
Odd thing is, it was always easier for me to remember just the planets' names than it was to remember those silly mnemonic devices.

edit: Amazing. Wiki has already put the new one in there...

My Very Educated Mother [[Can't|Ceres]] Just Serve Us Pizzas with [[Chovies|Charon]] [[X-cluded|2003 UB313]]
or
Most Video Evidence Must Convict Jewellery Smugglers Unless Near Penetratively Corrosive X-rays


Since the demotion of Pluto from its status of planet, a possible mnemonic for the remaining eight planets might be:

My Very Easy Method Just Speeds Up Nomenclature.

or maybe even


My Very Easy Method Just Stop Using Nine!


Or...

My Very Eager Mother Just Served Us Noodles!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
MasterMike said:
Of course it is, as stated by Kepler's first law of planetary motion. The point is that Pluto, however, is at a much more eccentric orbit that the other 8. The new definition means that because it crosses the path of Neptune, it is automatically relegated to a "dwarf planet".
Click to expand...
And conversely it means that cos Neptune has not cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit Neptune itself doesn't meet the definition of a planet.

Also what about trojan asteroids which share the same orbit as gas giants in the L4 and L5 Lagrange points. There were 1100 known as of mid 2005. Does there prescence mean that Jupitor isn't a planet?

Or does it mean the the IAU has got itself into a mess trying to scientifically define a word which has evolved from the general culture.
 
I know the point of the discussion going on here but, looking from another angle, it just looks ridiculous! After all, current technology hardly allows us to reach even Mars anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom