Leading astronomers of the world are
now trying to work out a more precise definition of a planet. By the end of August of this year (2006) they will have to either declare that one of our Solar System’s planets is not a planet or that there are about 20 planets in the Solar System. One thing is for sure: it will not be 9 planets anymore.
What do you think their decision will
be? More than 9 planets or less?
2006-08-18 16:45:35 · 12 answers · asked by dolempap 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
We will have the same number of planets that were there from before the time of the dinosaurs.
As Shakespeare said, "A planet by any other name still orbits the sun." Or something like that.
Now to the list.
Pluto = Planet
'Xena' = Planet
Ceres = Asteroid (Just the super-largest)
Charon = Moon (or Luna and a bunch that go around Jupiter and Saturn will also be planets)
Here's my criteria for 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.
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.
2006-08-19 00:22:36 · answer #1 · answered by SPLATT 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I do not know what they will decide. I have always felt that the definition of a planet is as arbitrary as the definition of a continent, just look at Europe and Asia. I think scientists need to come up with a specific definition of what makes a planet, since we are discovering other stars with them. Perhaps a minimum size or something. I just hope they do not demote Pluto, I have been to Lowell observatory where it was discovered.
2006-08-18 23:54:38 · answer #2 · answered by cyn1066 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Maybe we should go to Prague and listen in. I'm not going to place a wager, but I suspect there are bookmakers who'd take your bet either way.
Is it going to affect solar warming? Global warming? The cost of fuel? Will it affect whether NASA changes the course of the Pluto probe they just launched?
It won't affect my life, except to change a few more facts I'll want to store away for use in Trivial Pursuit games. Pluto and the Kuiper Belt objects don't care what we call them, as far as I can tell. It will disappoint a bunch of folks at Northern Arizona University and the Lowell Observatory, cause the number of tourists they have coming to visit may change.
2006-08-18 23:54:20 · answer #3 · answered by birchardvilleobservatory 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nine Planets Become 12 with Controversial New Definition
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/060816_planet_definition.html
2006-08-18 23:53:27 · answer #4 · answered by UncleGeorge 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
From what I've heard, by September we will have anywhere from 8 to 53 planets.
2006-08-18 23:53:42 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
There will be 3 more. Goofy, Donald, and Mickey.
2006-08-19 03:09:25 · answer #6 · answered by Ironball 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Bout tree fiddy.
2006-08-18 23:50:21 · answer #7 · answered by Black Sabbath 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
We'll have the same number we have always had, we'll just be aware of more of them.
2006-08-19 01:37:08 · answer #8 · answered by lmn78744 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
they have already decided,doofus.There are 12 planets now.
2006-08-18 23:53:51 · answer #9 · answered by That one guy 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It wont matter b/c the planets will be MINE!!!!!!!!
2006-08-18 23:51:07 · answer #10 · answered by Superman 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋