what do you think of pluto not being a planet?

Answer 1

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.

pluto is not a planet, but 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 so it is 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.

this same thing happened in the mid 1800s. beginning in 1800, astronomers found a few bodies orbiting the sun between the orbits of mars and jupiter. they finally stopped calling them planets after the fourth discovery. they gave the first one discovered, "1 ceres", the number one. no one 150 years from now no one will think pluto is a planet, and very few will even know we called pluto a planet. this does not change anything about the solar system or pluto. the iau has given pluto its number. "134340 pluto" is the official designation.

i don't know how long this will drag on tho. many planetary scientists are not satisfied that the definition is rigorous enough.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto

Answer 2

Pluto, the last planet to join the heavenly pantheon, became the first to leave it. The status of Pluto had been under discussion for some time, but with the discovery of 2003 UB313, nicknamed Xena, the question became acute, for it seemingly had as much right as Pluto to be called a planet.

On August 24, 2006, the International Astronomical Union surprised the world by voting in a new definition of planet, one that would exclude Pluto and bring the total number down to eight. (There had previously been been strong speculation that the redefinition would bring the total up to 12 instead of down.)

Pluto was instead classified as a dwarf planet, along with Ceres and the aforementioned Xena. The main difference between a dwarf planet and the real thing is that the dwarf variety has not cleared the area of its orbital path.

This redefinition met with a wave of protests from those who wanted to see the ninth planet grandfathered in, including but not limited to supporters of the late Clyde Tombaugh, who discovered Pluto in 1930. His widow, however, said he would have been accepting of the IAU's decision since "he was a scientist" and understood that astronomers had to take into account newly discovered objects in the Kuiper Belt (where Pluto is located).

But opponents of Pluto's demotion remain unconsoled and have generated a thriving industry in T-shirts, mugs and other memorabilia. Among the many slogans of this movement was one which played on the mnemonic for the names of the erstwhile nine:

Answer 3

Most of the people I've talked to still consider it a planet. The only ones that don't say it's too small, but I think they've all missed the point. It's big enough to have 3 moons and an atmosphere, and it's big enough to have made itself round. The reason the IAU doesn't consider it a planet is because it's in the Kuiper belt.
I personally think that anything that is big enough to become round and orbits a star is a planet. That would include the 8 that the IAU recognize as planets plus Ceres, Pluto, Charon, Sedna, Quoaor, 2003 UB313, 2005 FY9, and one other who's name I can't remember for a total of 16.
Remember that originally a planet was an object that moved independantly of the stars in the sky. Pluto does that.
Extrasolar planets don't have to meet so much criteria to achieve planet status.

Answer 4

The scientists are rIght on the money with this one. The object formally known as Pluto does not fit the new definition of "planet."

We should not keep referring to it as a planet simply because of nostalgia. Science is about moving forward, not looking back.

There was a point in time when mankind thought the Earth was flat. Scientists discovered that it was in fact round, and mankind moved on. Scientists of that time were right in not calling the world "flat" simply because there were some people who were nostalgic for the simpler "flat Earth hypothesis."

The same thing is true when it comes to Pluto being called a planet

Answer 5

Without a greater understanding there is no understanding. In 1930 an object was discovered. There was nothing to prevent it from being a planet. This is science and maybe 134340 is finally relived that it is properly categorized. I know I am. Now I am going to get myself an 11" telescope so I can look at the furthest planet Neptune. :)

Answer 6

I don't think it ever should have been considered a planet. It's characteristics are different than the other planets, not to mention its size.

Answer 7

As long as it is still there it can be whatever we want it to be. It is only semantics. To me it will always be a planet despite what the pundits have to say.

Answer 8

it doesnt matter to me but, if its not a planet then dont call it a planet i dont know why theres all this protesting and stuff scientist just have to except if there wrong their wrong and get over it

Answer 9

it is just a planet, i never think it is not

Answer 10

I agree with the decision to revoke it's planetary status.