Is it correct to delete pluto from solar system?

Answer 1

Pluto was not deleted. It was reclassified in a different category of Solar System objects from the one it previously was classified under,

What we have just witnessed in Prague is an exercise in scientific classifiation of the objects this branch of science studies, i.e. bodies in the Solar System and other extra-solar systems.

The basic probem Pluto has and had from the outset is that it is smaller than 7 moons in the Solar System: Ganymede, Io, Europa and Callisto (the 4 Gallilean moons of Jupiter) Titan (Saturn's largest moon) Triton (Neptune's largest moon) and our own Moon, all of which were discovered before Pluto.

Heirarchical thinking that Planets "ought" to be bigger than Moons and "size-ism" prejudice doubtless played a part in the recent IAU decision, But only a minor part. Mercury is smaller than the two biggest moons, Ganymede and Titan and it didn't get downgraded, did it?

From the way some people have reacted. anyone would think the IAU were out to "get" poor defenceless little Pluto and the discussion is clouded by anthropomorphic sentiments as a result,

Sentimental attachment is hardly a good basis for scientific classification. The discussion is also clouded by the fact that most people seem to be blissfully unaware of the number and variety of objects we now know there to be in the Solar System and similarly unaware of the fact that we (and Ceres) have been here before, 150 years ago.

Whilst there is understandable and widespread dismay at Pluto being demoted in status, 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 a terrestrial planet (the inner 4 planets) and a 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 and classify 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",

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,

SO: Pluto should not be a planet, nor should it be just another TNO or small solar system body, It has been given a status intermediate between these two extremes and that is how it should now be seen.

Answer 2

The reason that Pluto was excluded is that it's just one Kuiper Belt Object (KBO) of many that we've now seen. Either there are eight planets or there are more (probably a lot more) than nine. Nine is not logical no matter what. It's not fair to favor Pluto over other KBOs, some of which are probably larger. And it's better to treat KBOs like asteroids, which are also not considered planets. That way we have eight well defined planets, thousands of asteroids, and thousands of KBOs, instead of trying to pick some special asteroids and some special KBOs out and call them planets. What could make them special, that people wold not argue endlessly about?

Answer 3

yes it is absolutely right to delete pluto from the solar system since its diameter was less as compared to the other planets. if it would not be done then other 3 planets would also be added to the solar system which would lie its effect on the astronomy, students and scientist which would be a difficult task to be carry.

Answer 4

Pluto has not been deleted. It's still out there. It's exactly the same as it was yesterday and the day before. Tomorrow it will be the same.

The only thing different is that astronomers (who, being people who do astronomy for a living, know more about this that you do) have changed the way they classify it. Pluto's just not in the same league as the eight "real" planets, so the demoted it.

For crying out loud! Why is it people who had no interest in astronomy before are taking this so personal???

Answer 5

It is not deleted, it was merely being categorized to a dwarf planet.

Of course, Most people are taught since young that we have 9 planets in the solar system. Now that we are left with 8 in definition, I am not used to it personally.

However, I felt it might be necessary, considering nowadays more planets are being discovered.. Too much arguments..

Answer 6

No. Pluto was the cute little baby planet. For so many years it was a part of the solar system and nobody had a problem with it, so I don't get it...

Answer 7

no Mr kesavan since pluto beeeing a unique planet
in the solar system ,up till now any satillite is not reached
to pluto & examine how it is .Now the scientist are decideing that
it not a planet before this scientist, arabatta & other person's
decided that it not a planet at all.because they say this is growing
compared to when it found:kanish

Answer 8

An object which was formed during the birth of the star, and which revolves around its sun, is defined as the planet. If any other object Which goes around a planet is a moon of that planet. However the asteroids, which revolves around the sun are not treated as planets, basically because their orbits around the sun cannot be predicted with accuracy (due to interaction with other asteroids). Objects captured by the sun are not normally treated as planet. When we doubt the origin of Pluto it cannot be treated as planet anymore. Hence it is correct to remove the status of planet to Pluto. (like comets).

Answer 9

That's not what happened, It remains a member of the Solar System, albeit as a dwarf planet, a new category.

Answer 10

Cant delete it man!!
is it a pencil drawing??
well.....it has been degraded from the planet status...
anyway Kesavan it will take years to take place in our text books!!well....untill then Pluto is still a planet....what do our text books say is correct to win the marks...right?? ha haa


Well my messenger id is : timepass454

If u wish...we could be friends!!

Answer 11

100th time.


It is still part of our solar system... it is a comet and dwarf planet of our solar system.

We realized it's not a planet and want to stop calling it one.