Pluto not considerd a planet?

[_DRAGONMASTER_]

Has any one heard that pluto isnt considerd a planet any more? Just today they changed the guidelines for what a planet needs to meet in order to be a planet.http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060825/.../planet_mutiny

[stuart]

Yep. I'm glad, but I still don't like the new definition.

[Blue Fire]

I've been following this whole mess fairly closely. Like Stuart, I don't happen to agree with the IAU's definition, but at least they have something to work with. I've posted in other forums that this whole controversy reminds me of what went on when we had only 2 classification Kingdoms in Biology: Plants and Animals. But then came those monkey wrenches that were part plant and part animal. After much argument, we got 3 Kingdoms of life. To make a long and heated story short, now we 5 or 6 Kingdoms depending on which expert you consult.

If we learn anything from history, my bet is that not too far in the future, there'll be yet another definition, another revision, another refinement of what a planet is or is not. And if the still raging debates in other forums and blogs are any indication, that bet is a very good bet!

[Dragon Star]

I will ask everyone to keep in mind that definituons never stay the same as when they are made, their are always refinements for extra situations.

[Blue Fire]

I found this part of the article interesting:

NASA said Pluto's downgrade would not affect its $700 million New Horizons spacecraft mission, which this year began a 9 1/2-year journey to the oddball object to unearth more of its secrets.

But mission head Alan Stern said he was "embarrassed" by Pluto's undoing and predicted that Thursday's vote would not end the debate. Although 2,500 astronomers from 75 nations attended the conference, only about 300 showed up to vote.

"It's a sloppy definition. It's bad science," he said. "It ain't over."

Yup,... like I said, the issue isn't going to go away anytime soon. But, only 300 of the 2500 astronomers voted? I wonder what's up with that?! But the fact that 75 nations were represented by those atteding, is impressive.

Under the new rules, two of the three objects that came tantalizingly close to planethood will join Pluto as dwarfs: the asteroid Ceres, which was a planet in the 1800s before it got demoted, and 2003 UB313, an icy object slightly larger than Pluto whose discoverer, Michael Brown of the California Institute of Technology, has nicknamed "Xena." The third object, Pluto's largest moon, Charon, isn't in line for any special designation.

So, Charon becomes a What under the new rules? Pluto is a dwarf planet now, but Charon isn't? The Pluto/Charon system still orbits a barycenter. Maybe it's a double dwarf planet? Possible confusion here.

Brown, whose Xena find rekindled calls for Pluto's demise because it showed it isn't nearly as unique as it once seemed, waxed philosophical.

"Eight is enough," he said, jokingly adding: "I may go down in history as the guy who killed Pluto."

Brown may not be joking for long. I can easily envision a lot of upset public giving him less than positive feedback.

Ah, well,... life, er, I mean, the solar system goes on.

[The Mangler]

Found this pic...

[Blue Fire]

Originally Posted by The Mangler

Found this pic...

What a mangled sense of humor you have.... I Like it!

[Dragon Star]

Originally Posted by The Mangler

Found this pic...

I had no idea the planets of the solar system were hiring PR firms.

[Blue Fire]

And now there's this

Pluto: Down But Maybe Not Out
By Robert Roy Britt
LiveScience Managing Editor
posted: 31 August 2006
02:38 pm ET


If you did not like Pluto's demotion, don't give up hope.

Arguments over the newly approved definition for "planet" are likely to continue at least until 2009, and astronomers say there is much that remains to be clarified and refined.

While it is entirely unclear if the definition could ever be altered enough to reinstate Pluto as a planet, astronomers clearly expect some changes.

In a statement today, the largest group of planetary scientists in the world offered lukewarm support for the definition, which was adopted last week by a vote of just a few hundred astronomers at the International Astronomical Union (IAU) General Assembly meeting in Prague.

So, we have to wait until 2009 when the IAU meets again? I've heard that at least 300 astronomers in the U.S. have signed a petition that essentialy rejects the new planet definition and states that the signers won't go along with it. Oh, well people,... just accept the fact that you can't define a planet but, like art, you know it when you see it.