2006-09-05 14:35:15 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
Where did you hear this?
Pluto was not taken out of the solar system and was definitely not put in another one.
What happend was the scientists had to decide on a better definition of what a planet is. They were discovering many many objects that were bigger than pluto, but were they planets too? how do you exactly define a planet.
Since pluto was originally discovered we have found out that it is much smaller than originally thought, (at first we didn't know that alot of the mass was in its moon)
So since it is much smaller and does not fit the new definition it has been re classified as not a planet but a "dwarf planet" or transpneptunian object.
now you know
2006-09-05 14:48:53 · answer #1 · answered by zaphods_left_head 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Basically:
A. Pluto wasn't "taken out of our Solar System" it was just reclassified from a major planet to a dwarf planet along with Charon, Ceres, and 2003 UB(313).
B. Pluto was definetly not put into another solar system, nothing at all has changed about it except that it is not longer considered to be a Major Planet
2006-09-05 14:49:41 · answer #2 · answered by applepwnz 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
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?
2006-09-06 06:40:16 · answer #3 · answered by Bob 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the international astronomical union defined three terms "planet", "dwarf planet", and "small solar system body". this does not change anything about the solar system or pluto. it just corrects the mistake of classifying pluto as a planet initially
i have been waiting for this since i was about twelve. i feel somewhat satisfied. this was the right thing to do, believe me. i don't understand why so many are having such a problem with this.
because pluto orbits the sun, is round, does not have an isolated orbit (a bunch of other similar bodies have similar orbits.), and is not a satellite it is a dwarf planet.
(1) A "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".
look here:
http://www.iau2006.org/mirror/www.iau.org/iau0603/index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuiper_belt
2006-09-05 16:49:28 · answer #4 · answered by warm soapy water 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it didn't get taken out of the solar system it just got re-classified and is no longer a planet.
2006-09-05 14:40:33 · answer #5 · answered by Foxy_chicka_04 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sorry for the American pride,but Pluto is not the planet at all.It is a sort of the ring of cosmic debris.
2006-09-05 14:43:43 · answer #6 · answered by Alexandar K 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because they needed to sell new star maps, encyclopedias, and wall charts. Why else?
2006-09-05 15:37:36 · answer #7 · answered by sbcwinn 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋