planet or piece o rock??
2006-08-15 20:49:10 · 9 answers · asked by adam e 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
i think it should be demoted from a planet to a part of the cuper belt.
and leave the 8 classical planets to them selves.
2006-08-15 21:03:13 · answer #1 · answered by siripala 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Over 1,000 years ago the first definition of "planet" was anything in the sky that moved (a wandering star). That's what the translation of the word "planet" from the original Greek actually means. By the 17th century there were 6 planets. In 1781 Uranus was discovered, 20-25 years later 4 small planets were discovered for a total of 11 planets. Then Neptune for 12 planets. In 1853 the term minor planet was first used and the four small ones were demoted. By the end of the 19th century there were 500 minor planets (now known as the asteroid belt) and 8 major ones. This debate is not new and I blame the scientific community for not coming up with a clear definition of what a planet is. The International Astronomical Union are the governing body of astronomy, they make they rules and have the final say as to what a planet is, not us. And so far they have not made a decision. Also they recently discovered 2003 UB313 which is 3 times as far from the Sun than Pluto and bigger in size. So if Pluto is a planet than this object has to be one also. My feeling is if it's made of ice it's a Kuiper belt object. But in the end they will probably take the cowards way out and call it a minor planet, or a Kuiper Belt Planet or something like that.
2006-08-16 05:56:50 · answer #2 · answered by Paul 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Piece of rock. It's a Kuiper Belt Object, and there are likely MANY undiscovered KBO's which are around the same size as pluto, or bigger. Calling it a planet would mean calling Sedna, Quaoar, 2003 UB313 and probably in the future countless other objects planets as well, which I personally think is just silly.
It's not all astronomy this, a lot of it is semantics and therefore the general public's view is important as well.
I think the new International Astronomic Union suggestion is correct that there should be 8 classical planets and Pluto shouldn't count. Pluto is clearly different from the others, indeed it is smaller than our own moon.
2006-08-16 03:57:41 · answer #3 · answered by the last ninja 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
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.
2006-08-16 05:52:19 · answer #4 · answered by SPLATT 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Planet. Personally, I think any object big enough to be made spherical by gravity, and not orbiting another planet as a moon, should be called a planet.
If that means the solar system has dozens of planets, or even more, then so be it.
2006-08-16 04:03:12 · answer #5 · answered by Mark V 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well, it's got some rock, I think. . rock and ice, but they are thinking of kicking it out of the solar system, cause they have found dozens of other things out there (which also orbit the sun, but further out. . and some are bigger than Pluto, so if they allow Pluto in, they should allow these others in). . some astronomers are meeting right now in the Czech republic to debate this. .
2006-08-16 04:01:21 · answer #6 · answered by Wayne A 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
when it was discovered the best science of the day determined it to be a planet. i feel that though our science has improved what is wrong with leaving pluto as a planet
2006-08-16 03:59:33 · answer #7 · answered by cat fish 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Rock. A planet should contain half the mass of all the stuff in it's orbit. That's my opinion, anyways.
Pluto ain't close.
2006-08-16 04:15:05 · answer #8 · answered by Polymath 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
whatever you want. something inbetween, I'd say.
2006-08-16 03:56:39 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋