File :-(, x, )
Pluto - A Dwarf Planet Anonymous
RESOLUTION 5A
(1) A "planet" is a celestial body that
(a) is in orbit around the Sun,
(b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and
(c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit.

(2) A "dwarf planet" is a celestial body that
(a) is in orbit around the Sun,
(b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape,
(c) has not cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit, and
(d) is not a satellite.

(The eight planets are: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune.)


Comment too long. Clickhereto view the full text.
>> Anonymous
>>77561

I don't like the way the IAU can say something has with the word "planet" in the name of what it is is not a planet. That's nearly "War is peace" doubletalk. You can't use language that way. Dwarf modifies planet, therefore for it to be a dwarf planet, it must first *be* a planet.

I think they need a lesson on grammar before they start telling us what to call things.
>> Anonymous
Fuck that. Pluto has a moon. Therefore it's a planet. Who the fuck do these fuckers thing they are?

If a runaway planet came hurtling between the earth and the moon, unleashing cosmic destruction by altering Earth's orbit into one that crosses the asteroid belt (so that we no longer have a "swept orbit"), would we lose our "planet" status too?
>> Anonymous
>>77665
Pluto is actually in a binary orbit with it's "moon" which is about as big as it is. So really, they either both have to be planets or neither of them be planets.
>> Anonymous
>>77665
noone would be here to care

>>77603
wtf? next you're going to say that black "people" are "people". sheesh
>> Anonymous
Personally I think a planet should be recognized on a few criteria:

1. Spherical in shape
2. Have a gravity of at least .5g
3. Not be in the gravity well of a larger planet
4. Not be Pluto.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Fixed above picture.
>> Anonymous
>>77670
I was thinking maybe the solar system's door man should decide what is and is not a planet.

Either him, steve jobs, or woz ; )
>> Anonymous
definition,

Planet(n): an object weighing 500 or more lbs which sues airlines or movie theaters claiming theyre responsible for it's refusing to STOP EATING... may or may not be somebody's mother : P
>> Anonymous
>>77665
No, the strange object would not be classified as a planet, but we would still be a planet. The problem with Pluto is that it exchanges places with Neptune every so often so that it's closer for a short period of time to the Sun and intersects Neptune's orbit.

That does mean the name "Trans-Neptunian Object" applies loosely to Pluto.

Really, the entire reason we downgraded Pluto's status was because we originally thought Pluto was the largest Kuiper Belt object for years until very recently when even larger objects than Pluto have been found in the belt. By definition, we'd have to name them planets. However, that would be idiotic, since some of them have such strange orbits and are so far from the Sun that to name them planets would spite many scientists.

And so that's why Schoolchildren don't have to memorize one more planet.
>> Anonymous
>>77561

Is there a version of this pic that includes the moon(s), or at least the major moons of earth and the gas giants?
>> Anonymous
wait a minute... if the sun is there on the left of the photo, why are all the planets being lit by a light source which is above and to the right?

OH SHI-
>> Anonymous
Apparently there are over a dozen or so recently discovered "Dwarf Planets" outside the orbit of Neptune. They haven't been formally announced yet because scientists are still tracking and measuring them, but many are larger than Pluto.

That's the reason they did this. It was either create a new classification for Pluto and bodies like it, or announce that the Solar System has over 20 planets in it.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>77697or announce that the Solar System has over 20 planets in it.

... and there comes the biggest trouble: to give names to things like 2002AW197 or 2005FY9.

Planet Google?
>> Anonymous
RESOLUTION 7A
1) Pluto must be destroyed.
>> Anonymous
>>77719
Let's plan this.
>> Anonymous
>>77666
> Pluto is actually in a binary orbit with it's "moon"

So is the earth. Its just that the central point of the binary orbit happens to lie below the earth's surface.

Does a star stop being a star just because it's a binary? No. So neither should a planet.
>> Anonymous
>>77665
> If a runaway planet came hurtling between the earth and the moon, unleashing cosmic destruction

I can't believe nobody's gotten this one yet.
>> Anonymous
>>77665

Who the fuck do you think you are, besides an average 4channer ? Know your place, tard.

Pluto has a very inclined orbit in regard of the ecliptic. It's mainly compounded of ice, which makes it closer than comets than telluric planets. It's a member of a binary system of two objects comparable in terms of size and weight, which makes its companion Charon as eligible as Pluto for the title of planet ; and that would ruin the definition of this word as an object that isn't a satellite. And it's just a generic object of the Kuiper belt, which means that accepting it would lead to accept dozens of new other bodies in the future.

Sorry for destroying your dreams, America-fan or astrology-fan.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
"Every 1,000 years, Ra Metal, a huge planet that is home to an advanced civilization, passes close to Earth, bringing chaos and disaster to the smaller planet."
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>77760

1. I already know all that shit.

2. The earth / moon is also a binary planet system, so that argument is invalid. Sure the center of revolution is beneath the earth's surface, but it ain't the center of the earth.

3. Charon is almost as big as Pluto, but almost is only almost. It is the smaller of the two. That makes it the moon.

4. So it's a kuiper belt object. So there are more. So that would mean accepting dozens of more far orbit planets. So fucking what? What the fuck is the big deal with recognizing that our solar system has potentially dozens of tiny planets?

What the fuck is the problem with having more than nine planets. Why is is such a big deal that they'd rather eliminate one rather than add more?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>77769
>Why is is such a big deal that they'd rather eliminate one rather than add more?

"For now, the number of known objects in the solar system which are likely to be round is 53, with the number jumping to 80 when the objects from our survey are announced, and to more than 200 when the Kuiper belt is fully surveyed."
"Taking the number of planets from 9 (or 10) to 53 dramatically changes the look of the solar system."
--- Michael E. Brown, discoverer of "Xena"

http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/

(Image credit: Mike Brown, Caltech)
>> Anonymous
>>77769
ANY planet with moons is in a multiple orbital system: even Jupiter's orbit is slightly, but measurably, perturbed by its moons.
>> Anonymous
>>77777
>"Taking the number of planets from 9 (or 10) to 53 dramatically changes the look of the solar system."

The existance of those new objects "dramatically changes the look of the solar system" even if they are not classified as planets. Its a moot point.

This is just the scientists pulling moar BS EZmode on the average pleb.

Can't destroy their precious bubbles of reality by drastically changing the things they view as "truths".

Easier to convince everyone one thing isn't a planet anymore, and be done with it, than to teach them that there are now several dozen more out there.
>> Anonymous
>>77794
>This is just the scientists pulling moar BS EZmode on the average pleb.

Surely no a single school kid or an average pleb would like to see and learn a list of "planets + tiny planets":
Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Ceres, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, 2004TY364,
2002KX14, 2002XV93, 2003VS2, 1999TC36, 2001QF298, Orcus, 2003AZ84, Pluto, Ixion, Huya,
2005RN43, 1995SM55, 2002MS4, 2004SB60, 2004GV9, 2002UX25, Varuna, 2002TX300, 1996TO66, 2003OP32,
2003EL61, Quaoar, 2003QW90, 1999CD158, 1997CS29, 2000CN105, 1998WH24, 2005FY9, 2004PR107, 2003MW12,
2002CY248, 2002KW14, 2002AW197, 2002WC19, 2003QX113, 2003FY128, 2001UR163, 2002TC302, 1999DE9, 2004XR190,
2000YW134, 2003UB313, 2005RM43, Sedna

and the list is growing.


>Easier to convince everyone one thing isn't a planet anymore, and be done with it, than to teach them that there are now several dozen more out there.
>> Anonymous
>>77789

But the other poster was making a big deal about Pluto / Charon being a BINARY system, and therefore not qualifying as a planet blah blah blah. I just thought it was necessary that he's standing on a binary system too.

Also, because Jupiter has multiple moons, it doesn't have a single central point of revolution. The binary earth / moon and pluto / charon systems do (give or take a few angstroms caused by artificial satellites).
>> Anonymous
>>77800
> Surely no a single school kid or an average pleb would like to see and learn a list of "planets + tiny planets":

Give them all real names, and not that 2005FU47 moonspeak, and I'd give it a try. Besides, 200 plus planets gives us enough to have some really cool names from more mythologies than just greek / roman and shakespeare.

I, for one, would like to see Planet Bob Dobbs.

> "This [12-planet] definition takes the magic out of the solar system."

Oh fuck him. I think it makes it a helluva lot cooler. We don't have to look out into deep space for cool stuff. Our own local solar system is a lot more intricate and wonderful than anyone ever imagined.
>> Anonymous
All this.. And not once an URANUS joke >_<

..I'll get my coat
>> Malvorean
>>77802

You need to learn what 'binary system' means.
>> Yukito !ozOtJW9BFA
>>77777
Ahhhh!

77777get, pretty much a winner for actually being able to quote.
>> Anonymous
>Our own local solar system is a lot more intricate and wonderful than anyone ever imagined.

Changing the classification of "planet" doesn't change the amount of intricacy or wonderfulness of the solar system one little bit.
>> Anonymous
>>77844

Really?

What's your definition, then?
>> Anonymous
>>77915

> Changing the classification of "planet" doesn't change the amount of intricacy or wonderfulness of the solar system one little bit.

No. It doesn't.

But it TRIES to. That's the problem.
>> Anonymous
U R ANUS
>> Anonymous
Oh, cripes. Leave it to 4chan to bitch about EVERYTHING.
>> Havok
So Pluto isnt really a planet anymore,and there is a new one "Ceres" and this 2003 one.I dont belive it for a second.
>> Anonymous
whatever happened to "planet x" amirite?


srsly anyone remember?
>> Anonymous
>>78390
Pluto is no longer a planet, but there are no new planets. The proposal that would have left Pluto a planet would have taken our solar system to 12 planets (including Ceres) and likely closer to 50 or so planets over time.

The counter proposal, which passed, decided that Pluto is a dwarf planet, rather than a planet but that means those other bodies will not be planets either.

Read the news.
>> Anonymous
Fuck their classification
Pluto is Pluto
I mean what. does this mean we cant teach kids about Pluto anymore I mean what the fuck does it matter except from a purely scientific stand point. Its still there.
>> Anonymous
Pluto, I don't care what they call you, to me you'll always be the same insignificant piece of rock thousands of miles away.

>>78429
QFT.
>> Anonymous
I'm an astronomer and I still don't get the fucking point of all this news coverage. So they finally classified what a planet is - great.

Pluto hasn't disappeared and we've still got a probe on it's way to observe it. But it was never a true planet to me since I suspect it didn't form at the same time from the protoplanetary nebula as the other planets did.

The biggest reason I'm pissed is this fucks up all my mnemonics for planets. :(

>>78045
A binary system musn't have the centre of mass inside one of the objects. They'd visibly spin around each other, as opposed to one wobbling.

You wouldn't call a single planet solar system a binary system, would you?
>> Anonymous
Why are we arguing this?
What's done is done. It doesn't make sense to say that Pluto should be a planet because you think it should.
Hell, half the people here think women should have penises... If that came true the world would explode.
>> Anonymous
So when i said in my science test that pluto wasnt a planet 4 years ago... do i get credit now ?
>> Anonymous
>>78567

> I'm an astronomer.

You lie. There are no womeon on the internet. AND 4channers do not have real jobs.

>Binary system.

Binary means two. That's it. That's all. Where the common point of orbit is doesn't matter. A binary star composed of small dwarf star that orbits a massive giant which merely wobbles (such as Procyon) is still a binary star.

And no, a single planet solar system is not two of anything. Think about it. It is one star and one planet. It is not a binary star because it is not two stars. It is not a binary planet because it is not two planets.
>> Anonymous
I say I still decide which to call a planet, and which not to, big brother already decides the laws and shit, I'll be damned if I can't decide what to call a planet, and what to not give a damn about.
>> Anonymous
>>78600
A single planet solar system is still a binary system, though.
>> Anonymous
>>77665
Then the planet Xena should be the 10th planet. It's a bit further out than pluto and it is bigger and has a moon. Also ceres in the meteor belt should be one then to. If they kept pluto a planet, they would have to add like ten more to be fair. There really isn't anything special about pluto.
>> Anonymous
>>78600
Technically, a month should be the amount of time it takes the moon to orbit the earth, but what's your point?
>> Anonymous
>>78635

So what does the periodicity of the moon's orbit have to do with anything?

What's YOUR point?
>> Anonymous
>>78652
Nothing at all.

Just like the BS definition of "binary planet" that includes the Earth. Might as well bitch about the proper length of a month.