i like pluto
2006-09-10 03:49:31 · 13 answers · asked by Maggie C 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
pluto is not a planet. 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 defined as a dwarf planet. 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. i knew that pluto didn't fit the pattern set by the major bodies in the solar system so it was an anomaly. it just felt illogical and "out of place". this was the right thing to do, believe me. i don't understand why so many are having such a problem with this.
i don't know how long this will drag on tho. many planetary scientists are not satisfied that the definition is not rigorous enough.
2006-09-10 04:55:15 · answer #1 · answered by warm soapy water 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't think it should be one.
The problem is, if you let Pluto be called a planet, a lot of other things would qualify as planets too. You can have either 8 planets or a whole lot of planets. Nine is not logical. The definition that's been made of planets needs some work. But the result (8 planets) is correct.
The reason that Pluto was excluded is that it's just one Kuiper Belt Object (KBO) of many that we've now seen in that general area. Either there are eight planets or there are more (probably a lot more) than nine. t's not fair to favor Pluto over other KBOs, some of which are probably larger. 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. Otherwise we would have to try to pick some special asteroids and some special KBOs out and call them planets. What could make them special, that people would not argue endlessly about?
2006-09-10 04:57:44 · answer #2 · answered by Bob 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think your question should be "why shouldn't pluto remain as a planet?"
Apparently Pluto is smaller than the moon, and the moon is not considered to be a planet so...Pluto is now a proto-planet, isn't that enough for you?
2006-09-10 03:53:47 · answer #3 · answered by jeshzisd 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The whole idea of "clearing it's neighborhood" sounds dumb to me. Why couldn't the IAU agree on size and orbital mechanics requirements for planethood. By their current definition, Neptune may no longer qualify since its orbit crosses over Pluto's every 50 years or so.
Heck, clearing it's neighborhood sounds like something you would do if you lived in Detroit!
2006-09-10 03:53:13 · answer #4 · answered by But why is the rum always gone? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is the opinion of about 260 astronomers that is should be downgraded,
Out of 10000 members of the IAU, it is less than 2% of it.
Not a representative sample
2006-09-10 03:52:07 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I like pluto too, it was my favorite planet.
2006-09-10 03:51:59 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
It should remain cause it will mess up all those pneumonics i learnt as a child such as
Many Venusians eat mouldy jam sandwiches under news paper.
2006-09-10 03:52:24 · answer #7 · answered by Bebe 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because Mickey Mouse says so.Look if the greatest mouse in American history says his dog is a planet then who are we to change things.
2006-09-10 03:54:36 · answer #8 · answered by sjwest74 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
because it has a precise orbit ,which is a characteristic of planets
2006-09-10 04:13:36 · answer #9 · answered by xavier h 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, for one it floats around in space and has a moon. I think the scientist are doing it for attention. lol
2006-09-10 03:56:00 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋