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

Attention everyone,
Pluto is no longer a planet and we need to get it back.
Its a small planet, But its a planet.
According to the news its not a planet.
so plz sign the petition

http://www.petitiononline.com/PP896/petition.html

Thx

Jon

2006-08-26 09:07:35 · 10 answers · asked by jonyboy26 1 in Science & Mathematics Astronomy & Space

10 answers

hey dude I signed it!! Pluto definetly is a planet!!!!!!!!!!

2006-08-26 09:10:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

You are jealous that kids if the future will only have to memorize 8 Planet names instead of 9.

When I first learned about Pluto, in 5th grade science, the argument was that Pluto didn't meet the requirements to be called a planet. That was less than 30 yrs after its discovery. It doesn't fit the definitions of a planet and therefore, should not be called one. Pluto is nothing more than a very large Asteroid. Just because it orbits the sun doesn't make it one either. Everything in our Solar System orbits the sun. Even object from outside the Solar System enters and then orbits the Sun due to its gravitational pull.

Should we start calling the moons of other planets "Planets" because they are larger than Pluto?

Change always upsets those who fear it.

2006-08-26 10:03:58 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

the international astronomical union corrected the mistake of classifying pluto as a planet initially. this does not change anything about the solar system or pluto, but it does change the language to fit observation. this means the anything that orbits with a bunch of other bodies is a dwarf planet.

(1) A classical 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 neighborhood 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 neighborhood around its orbit, and (d) is not a satellite.

(3) All other objects orbiting the Sun shall be referred to collectively as "Small Solar System Bodies".

2006-08-26 13:29:50 · answer #3 · answered by warm soapy water 5 · 0 0

What's the petition for? Pluto is still a planet.

2006-08-26 10:35:36 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

NASA are idiots? Hah, yeah right. Whose really the idiot? Astronomers, & such, discovered ALL these planets and if ya'll really read up on why they "demoted" Pluto, you'd realize that it's quite understandable.

2006-08-26 09:13:53 · answer #5 · answered by Empress 3 · 1 1

I hate pluto

2006-08-26 09:10:09 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

ok look I LOVE PLUTO!

but....what the astronmers said does make sense ...meaning demoting Pluto is kinda....if not alot reasonable..so.....i want it back too....back...

2006-08-26 11:41:10 · answer #7 · answered by Man 5 · 0 1

jonyboy26,

Go onto my name. Click a question that is right after this one. Tell this person to sign your petition!

this question:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Amn8_EZXZBI2hfKLDQsjVYjsy6IX?qid=20060826131408AAZaFMw

2006-08-26 09:23:55 · answer #8 · answered by otter7 5 · 0 0

Even the smallest who is a person.

2006-08-26 09:13:43 · answer #9 · answered by rltouhe 6 · 0 1

I fail to see why an IAU decision makes NASA idiots ... Like the lady says, try and understand the reasons before you condemn the decision.

There is understandable dismay at Pluto being demoted in status but people really need to understand the reasons the IAU had to grapple with definitions and categories at this time,:

(1) in 1930 we knew of just one body lying beyond the orbit of Neptune. Now we know of more than 1000

(2) we are discovering asteroids at a rate of 5000 a month

(3) we now know of 200+ extra-solar planets orbiting 170+ other stars, some of which we now know to have asteroid belts

It is conceivable the IAU may create more categories in the future in the light of more discoveries, The moment we find an extra-Solar System planet with extra-terrestrial life on it, for example, I would expect Habitable Zone Planet to be a new category and only Earth and Mars of our local 8 planets to be in it.

We already have the distinction between terrestrial planet (the inner 4 planets) and gas giant (the outer 4 planets) and are assessing new extra-Solar-System planets in the light of that distinction and a new category name for the informally-named "hot Jupiters" (i.e. large planets orbiting near to their star at less than 1 AU distance) of which we know several, may not be far away,

As science expands its knowledge, it needs more concepts and categories with which to describe that knowledge, That is perfectly normal and should neither surprise nor alarm us,

Creating new categories and reclassifying known objects in the light of them has happened before: in the 19th Century when the number of planets was pruned from 11 to 7 out of concern that being consistent and admitting other, newly discovered bodies to the planetary club that were similar to the ones they chose to kick out instead would have meant the number of planets could rapidly start to escalate and mushroom out of control,

To understand what is going on now, it helps to understand what went on then,

The number of bodies in the Solar System known to astronomers has been burgeoning for a long time now, but the general public seems unaware of this, given the way people blithely talk of Ceres (discovered 1801) Charon (discovered 1978) and Xena (discovered 2003) having "just been discovered", And given how one Yahoo answerer recently confidently asserted that Ceres, Charon and Xena were all "newly formed"!

(I wish people wouldn't make up astronomical theory on the hoof like that! The gullible will only go and repeat such Malapropisms as gospel truth!) (Gossip-tell truth would be a more apt description,)

There was a similar definitions crisis in the early 19th century and again in the mid-19th Century as the number of known objects in the Solar System started to grow and grow,

By 1807 the 8 Solar System bodies known to classical astronomy (the Sun, the Earth, our Moon and the 5 classical planets known from antiquity, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn) (1 star, 6 planets, 1 moon) had grown to 26. Uranus was found in 1781 making 7 planets. There were 4 Jovian moons, 7 Saturnine moons and 2 Uranian moons, 14 in all

And then there was the discovery of the first four asteroids. These were 1 Ceres on January 1, 1801, 2 Pallas on March 28, 1802, 3 Juno on September 1, 1804, and 4 Vesta on March 29, 1807,

What were astronomers to call these new objects? They weren't moons as they rotated around the Sun, so they had to be planets, didn't they? As there was, initially, no other category but moons or planets to put them in.

After 2 Pallas was discovered though, Sir William Herschel (the discoverer of Uranus) coined the term "asteroid" meaning "star-like"), in 1802.

But Ceres was meantime assigned a planetary symbol, and remained listed as a planet in astronomy books and tables (along with 2 Pallas, 3 Juno and 4 Vesta) for about half a century until further asteroids were discovered.

So we now had 1 star, 11 planets and 14 Moons, the beginnings of a distinction between major and minor planets and a sense of unease as to what we would do if more asteroids were discovered as the first four were all disappointingly small in size, so did they really belong in the planetary club? (Similar doubts were expressed about Pluto, right from the outset in 1930,)

38 years pass and then in 1845 the asteroid 5 Astraea is discovered and on September 23, 1846 the planet Neptune and a mere 17 days later on October 10, 1846, Neptune's moon, Triton. (We now have 1 star, 12 Planets 15 Moons and 1 non-planetary Asteroid.)

The pace of discovery then starts to really hot up. Four more asteroids in nine months: 6 Hebe on July 1, 1847, 7 Iris on August 13, 1847, 8 Flora on October 18, 1847, and 9 Metis April 25, 1848

Then on September 16, 1848 an 8th moon of Saturn called Hyperion is discovered,

Plus a further 6 asteroids are found in just over two years: 10 Hygiea on April 12, 1849, 11 Parthenope on May 11, 1850, 12 Victoria on September 13, 1850, 13 Egeria on November 2, 1850, 14 Irene on May 19, 1851 and 15 Eunomia on July 29, 1851.

And on October 24, 1851 a 3rd and a 4th moon of Uranus: called Ariel and Umbriel were discovered.

So now we had 42 objects: 1 star 12 planets 18 moons and 11 asteroids. If the latest asteroids were all to be regarded as planets, making a total of 23 planets (and 10 Hygiea was bigger than 3 Juno, just like Xena is bigger than Pluto), it was likely to start getting silly (by 1868 the number of asteroids was to rise to 107 and Victorian schoolchildren would have needed a massive 115-word mnemonic to remember all the names).

The unease grew to a crisis, a redefinition was clearly necessary and an inevitable decision was taken to regard all 15 asteroids as a separate category from planets and Ceres, Pallas, Juno and Vesta were kicked out of the planetary club, just like Pluto has been kicked out now.

There are some clear parallels between the situation in the 1850s and the situation now, Four under-sized runts had obtained planetary status, with seemingly more to follow as they were discovered, creating an overwhelming feeling among astronomers that the currency would be devalued if all these further objects were to then be automatically awarded planetary status. So they cried Whoa! And called a halt. And created a new category, Just like the IAU has now done,

SO HOW MANY OBJECTS HAVE WE GOT IN THE SOLAR SYSTEM NOW?

Stars: 1

Planets: 8

Moons: over 80 known moons of the dwarf planets, asteroids and other small solar system bodies.

(The asteroid 87 Sylvia has 2 moons for example as does the Kuiper Belt Object KBO 2003 EL61.)

AND another 162 moons orbiting around planets: Mercury has none, Venus has none, Earth has 1, Mars has 2, Jupiter has 63, Saturn has 56, Uranus has 27, Neptune has 13.

Kuiper Belt Objects: over 800 (all discovered since 1992).

Trans-Neptunian Objects: over 1000 (includes the 800+ KBOs) i,e, there are 200+ in the Scattered Disk and the Oort Cloud.

Asteroids: Hundreds of thousands of asteroids have been discovered within the solar system and the present rate of discovery is about 5000 per month. As of July 23, 2006, from a total of 338,186 registered minor planets, 134,339 have orbits known well enough to be given permanent official numbers. Of these, 13,242 have official names.

Current estimates put the total number of asteroids above 1 km in diameter in the solar system to be between 1.1 and 1.9 million

So you can see

(a) why some definitions are needed and why reclassification is necessary

(b) how totally unaware of the state of scientific knowledge the general public is and how uninformed people are when they get excited at tales of "3 new planets being discovered" and wonder if there might perhaps be more where those came from,

Finally, these issues need to be seen in the context of the 205 extra-solar planets we now know to exist and the asteroid belts that have now been detected in some of those stellar systems,

Consistency being a desirable thing to achieve in science, whatever definitions and categories the IAU now adopt, they need to be applicable to every star with other objects in orbit around it, throughout the entire universe, That is the context in which Pluto's status is now being discussed,

2006-08-26 09:31:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers