English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I guess there has been some contraversy over this recently. Should they keep the solar system to 9 planets for simplicity in learning them or try to be more accurate as we find out more. Try learning 36, or whatever it is, that some are advocating!

2006-08-15 05:47:43 · 13 answers · asked by Texanole 2 in Science & Mathematics Astronomy & Space

13 answers

General question. What makes a planet a planet? Is it the mass? Diameter? Orbit? Distance from the sun?

I would say that the following are minimum characteristics of planets.

1 & 2 below are arbitrary, you may prefer other variables.

1. Minimum Mass. 10^20 Kg. (about 1/100th the mass of Pluto).
2. Minimum Diameter. 1,500 Km (about 900 miles)
3. Orbit. Must be in orbit around a sun, and not a planet (therefore, Luna is not a planet, even though it's larger than Pluto).
4. Distance from sun. Not relevant, as long as it is clearly in orbit around the sun. Therefore, a massive sun may have planets dozen's of light-years away.
5. Is not itself a sun. That would be a binary or higher system.
6. Must not be in interstellar space, not associated with a sun or suns.
7. Not in a field of other bodies with the same approximate orbit. That would leave out anything in the Asteroid Belt and Oort Cloud.

So, I say that Pluto is a planet.

Now, how about "Xena" (aka, 2003 UB313)? To Hades (Greek God of the underworld) with conventions for naming planets. Xena is perfect. And Gabrielle for the moon.

2006-08-15 07:25:11 · answer #1 · answered by SPLATT 7 · 0 0

We can't learn about all the planet as each time a new one is coming up in space. The nine is large enough and is known from a long time. Do you know some planet don't even obey the normal ellipitical orbit system as they go in linear motion. The planet has to be working with all the laws which govern the rest of the nine planet thus we can't study all planet all at once. Besides there are so little information about these new planet. Pluto is the furthest but still the design and codes of control is known. Yes it is a planet by the way according to NASA. You can study or keep track of planet by powerful telescope but you can't study all like syllabus.

2006-08-15 12:59:42 · answer #2 · answered by payal m 2 · 0 0

At the begining of the Sapce age during the 1960's till the late 20th century, the world knew only 9 planets in the Solar system. Later in 2002, scientists with advanced satelites, probes and space telescopes discovered another planet beyond Pluto. This new discovered planet was coded instead of giving it a name. The latest discovered planet after the previous one was also coded, something like VNB-2003 or something like that (I'm sorry, codes are very hard to remember you know).
Well, new discoveries and inventions meet our lives every now and then. Who knows how big our Solar system really is?

2006-08-15 13:00:25 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I think that they should try try to be as accurate as possible. From what I've learned about pluto in school they said it was ice and rock, well if that is actually the case then all the other large masses of ice and rock would have to be added as a planet, or take pluto out. Simply put science isn't about simplicity it's about accuracy. I have no idea why people are trying to keep pluto a planet if it isn't one. Let it go people!!

2006-08-15 12:58:24 · answer #4 · answered by Chinara O 2 · 0 0

I believe it is. It has an atmosphere, other solid extrasolar planets far away have very similar composwition, and 3 moons, count em, 3!! it isnt a "planet", but I think it could be called a "ice dwarf planet" or double planet system.

And who knows! We have found a body of ice larger than pluto in some of the other parts of the solar system. We might be able to find even more out there.

2006-08-15 12:56:12 · answer #5 · answered by iam"A"godofsheep 5 · 0 0

i read that, even tho pluto is considered a planet cuz of its size, now we find out there are at least a coupla more planet-sized lumps floating around out there, bigger than pluto, that deserve some attn. so since we have advanced alot more than we were even 25-30 yrs ago in the astronomy dept i think we should dump pluto n add whaever planets there are out there

2006-08-15 12:55:50 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

the problem with pluto is that the size.

kuiper belt, the "group" of asteroids are around us, and the size is too small to be called a planet. the same with pluto and sedna (or xena?). if we doesn't verify what the acceptable size for a "rock" to be called a planet, then probably we'll end up with hundreds and thousands of planet's name to be remembered.......

2006-08-15 12:55:02 · answer #7 · answered by apc_nuke 4 · 0 0

Pluto has an atmosphere and at least one moon,... I think that makes it a planet, . . .

Not some boneless doggie toon that runs around with a half nekkid mutant mouse.

2006-08-15 15:00:18 · answer #8 · answered by somber_pieces 6 · 0 0

yes pluto is a real planet

2006-08-15 15:36:41 · answer #9 · answered by peaches105 2 · 0 0

Of couse Pluto is a real planet!!!!

2006-08-15 12:53:52 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers