English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

and define planet. how come if these are just gas, they can stay in the solar sytem,but since pluto was ice they removed it from the lists. i think that was just stupid. now we will teach our kids MVEMJSUN nine what?!

2007-02-24 03:38:07 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics Astronomy & Space

7 answers

We CAN go visit the Jovian planets! We just cant set foot on them as they have no solid surface. At certain elevations, the temperature and atmospheric pressure is positively balmy (although poisonous), so we COULD go and fly around in some kind of lighter than air craft/hot air balloon ship.

As for "planet"....
Well for starters, Pluto is just too small. In the neighborhood where Pluto lives? Planets are supposed to be huge. The Jovian planets, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune are 20 to 300 times the size of the Earth, and Pluto is really small compared to the Earth, smaller than our Moon. Kind of stands out.

And Pluto is not made out the same material as the Jovians. The large planets are mostly gigantic spheres of gas, mostly hydrogen and helium. Likely there are no solid surfaces, only denser and denser gas all the way in. Pluto is a small solid world of methane, water, carbon dioxide and ammonia ices, maybe a little rock and with a just hint of atmosphere (that freezes out and falls as snow in her "winter").

And third, Pluto's orbit is the most eccentric (oval shaped) and the most tilted to the plane that the rest of the planets orbit in. Also, Pluto is locked in a resonance with Neptune's orbit and comes closer to the sun than Neptune sometimes.

There were theories that Pluto was a lost moon of Neptune but that was before we discovered she a has one large moon (Charon) half her size (pretty much, this system is a double planet) and recently two other teeny-tiney moons.

Pluto seems like she cant be an ejected moon-she must have formed on her own and seems to be part of an entire army of small icey-dwarf objects that circle just outside Neptune's orbit in what is known as the Kuiper belt. We have no idea of how many or how large these objects may be. NOT "planets" proper, hence the new term "dwarf planet" where Pluto is king.

BUT I still think Pluto should be called a planet because of historical reasons (discovered by an American, financed by Percival Lowell, Tombaugh's life story, etc).

2007-02-24 04:27:52 · answer #1 · answered by stargazergurl22 4 · 0 0

Well, another reason why they removed pluto is also because it was much smaller than other planets, more the size of a biggish dwarf planet (dwrf planets are not the same as planets, as i understand it)

But ye, i guess that if planets are almost entirly made up of gases, and none of the other fundimental elements needed for us to live or at least land on them, we probs wont ever be able to visit them in the future.

This is one of the reasons why I think we should stop wasting our money on trying, in vain to explore outer space, if it could be put to much better use in an effort to preserve our "naturally perfectly suited to life", little Earth so that it could be able to sustain us for as long as possible.

2007-02-24 03:46:36 · answer #2 · answered by Eryn v 3 · 0 0

I refuse to say what will happen in the future, some technological breakthrough could happen tommorow and make me look more foolish then I do now.

However, without some breakthrough, I don't see how we can ever visit some of the giants in our solar system.

I, will always reguard Pluto as a planet. I may be wrong, but I am to old to change now.

2007-02-24 03:49:15 · answer #3 · answered by Walking Man 6 · 1 0

Firstly Pluto was'nt removed from the list for ice, and as regards yer question about future visits to planets made of gaseous matter,maybe by the time we are capable of reaching there we might have developed some environment to carry with us,or developed somethin to overcome this difficulty.But frankly, this isnt going to happen within our life span.

2007-02-24 03:51:33 · answer #4 · answered by MrKnow_All 4 · 0 1

of course we can. Once we construct an orbital station near the gas planets. Viewing it would be alot easier.

2007-02-24 17:44:20 · answer #5 · answered by The Borg 4 · 0 0

Mer: Too Hot
Ven: Too Hot
Earth: Nice Place
Mars: We could stay there for a bit, but not that long
Jup: Would crush us, and has no surface that we know of
Sat: Would crush us, and has no surface that we know of
U: Not enough is known about it yet
N: Solid, with gas atmosphere.
B

2007-02-24 04:44:52 · answer #6 · answered by Bacchus 5 · 0 1

Mine has predicted both good & bad, so I think she is a true medium on all accounts

2016-03-28 22:40:33 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers