Why did astronomers just decide to demote pluto?

Question

I just want to know why astronomers just DECIDED to demote pluto after 76 years of being in the solar system

Answer 1

Because if Pluto stays on as a planet, by the end of this century, the solar system will have over a hundred planets, most of them Kuiper Belt objects like Pluto. Kids in school will fall behind in astronomy in trying to learn all the names of them, and people like you will be asking, "Why didn't astronomers just decide to drop off Pluto?"

Answer 2

It's still in the Solar System and that isn't going to change. It's just not concidered a planet, that's all.

At the time Pluto was discovered, astronomers didn't know about the many other smaller heavenly bodies in our System. They discovered a rock just past Neptune and, dispite it's size and odd characteristics, made it a planet.

As time passed, other small objects were found within the solar system that have similarly odd characteristics, so many of them that it started becoming a problem. What makes Pluto a planet and not all these other hunks of rock not?

In the end it was evident that nothing seperated them and that is Pluto was to be included as a planet at least 6 or so other objects would have to be reclassified as planets as well. The decision was made to keep thr stricter deffintion and leave Pluto out, reclassifying it as a 'planetoid' or 'dwarf planet'.

Answer 3

Because bodies that are as large (and in at least one case bigger) as Pluto have been recently discovered. So, there was the choice: add a dozen new bodies (with perhaps several dozen later as they are discovered) or drop luto from the list. For the record, Pluto was discovered by sheer luck, and then unexplained perurbations in the orbit of Neptune prompted astronomers to seach a portion of the sky for a yet undiscovered planet, and Pluto just happeend to be there at that time. Pluto does not the bulk required to affect Neptunes orbit in any measurable way; those perturbations did not exists, it was just an error in the estimation of Neptune's mass.
Honestly, not having Pluto as a planet is actually making Gustav Holst masterpiece "The Planet" complete as it stopped at Neptune (it was written before the discovery of Pluto).

Answer 4

Vincent G came close, but he failed to mention that Pluto's orbit is more eccentric than any of the eight "real" planets in our solar system.

Pluto's orbit actually comes _inside_ Neptune's (more regular) orbit at times. No other planet possesses such an eccentricity, but plenty of solar-system bodies like asteroids do.

This is but one more reason to demote Pluto from the exalted status of planet, to one of those bodies more akin to asteroids.

Like another user said, true Science is self-correcting. Si yo nara, Pluto, and good riddance!

Answer 5

with the aid of latest reckoning of the complaints as we talk IAU convention it is probable to stay interior the Premiership of planets. If Charon get's promoted to planet prestige it incredibly is definitely fairly reasonable because of the fact Charon would not definitely orbit Pluto. it incredibly is virtually equivalent in length to Pluto and has comparable features. Pluto and Charon the two rotate around a correct factor of gravity between them.

Answer 6

My understanding is that science has further defined what a planet is and suddenly Pluto no longer fits into the definition. I think it is good that science can reexamine its understanding of things and make adjustments when needed.

Answer 7

Power and control.

Answer 8

They are mean and hate Disney

Answer 9

perhaps they were in league with the textbook printing companies.