Who doesn't agree with the demotion of the [dwarf] planet Pluto?

Question

The reasons aren't consistent with the rest of the solar system!

Answer 1

No, it is not a planet, not anymore. But I Don't think they should have taken it away. I mean its been a planet for how long, and now they just one day decide it not a planet? Astronomers make up your mind already!

Answer 2

The reasons are consistent!

In fact, the very reason that it was "demoted" (reclassified, actually) was because our previous definition was not consistent.

Mainly because there hardly was one.

We needed to come up with a definite size limit that would exclude the thousands of Kuiper Belt objects so that the list would not grow to stupid lengths.

Including Pluto for anything other than arbitrary historical or sentimental reasons would have meant including hundreds of larger Pluto-like bodies, and one asteroid.

Using Pluto itself as a limit would have been an arbitrary solution too.

Other than declaring that there are no planets and coming up with new terms for rocky bodies, gas giants and tiny frozen Kuiper objets, and that would have been even more controversial and annoying than reclassifying Pluto.

A planet, as defined by the International Astronomical Union (IAU), is a celestial body orbiting a star or stellar remnant that is massive enough to be rounded by its own gravity, not massive enough to cause thermonuclear fusion in its core, and has cleared its neighbouring region of planetesimals.

This is the first formal definition of a planet, and Pluto is denied by virtue of the last point. It is not large enough to have cleared its orbit.

Pluto is not the only "planet" to have been "demoted":

Ceres was a planet between 1801 and 1864, became an asteroid and is now a dwarf planet.
The asteroid Pallas was considered a planet 1802-1864
The asteroid Juno was considered a planet 1804-1864
The asteroid Vesta was considered a planet 1807-1864

Answer 3

The scientists changed the definition of planets, and so Pluto no longer meets that definition, but for nearly 8 decades, it was taught to be one of nine planets. No reason scientists can't still call it a planet, just put an asterisk next to its name, like what will happen when Barry Bonds breaks the home record.

Answer 4

I really like nick s' answer. he's totally right. they changed the definition of what a planet is, and now pluto no longer qualifies. it's NOT like they all of a sudden realized that pluto is filled with marshmellows on the inside and therefore isn't what we considered a planet.
They make the rules, and then they change the rules. (Happens in sports all the time.) think about the classification of animals. what is a mammal? what makes something a mammal? the definition has had to be modified cause they find birds with hair, frogs with mammary glands, snakes giving birth to live young, etc.
Those examples might be wrong, just trying to illustrate my point. I don't even know what the true definition of mammal is. I'm gonna wiki it.

Answer 5

What are you blathering on approximately Aristree? The concensus is that the universe is 13,7 billion years previous (and the image voltaic equipment 4.6 billion years previous), So permit's gave much less of those woolly exaggerations of three hundred billion years in the past (and gazillions of stars). they do no longer seem to be scientific solutions! additionally you appear to be perplexed with regards to the version between the universe and the image voltaic equipment. The Oort Cloud merchandise, Sedna is customary to orbit rather elliptically such that at its furthest far off from the sunlight this is 975 AU away. This compares with 40 9 AU for Pluto at its furthest away. So we now be attentive to that the image voltaic equipment at its outermost extremities isn't basically comets, yet i do no longer see how that makes it get any extra suitable! in simple terms extra densely populated. yet to respond to the question: From 1807 to 1846 there have been 11 planets and whilst Neptune develop into chanced on in 1846 there have been 12, i'm able to think of the same dissatisfied and outcry whilst the variety develop into slashed to eight interior the 1860s and Ceres, Pallas, Juno and Vesta have been reclassified as asteroids, yet who recollects that now? Who even knows approximately it? It develop into performed for comparable motives. They have been too small and there have been too many extra of them then being chanced on (extra suitable than one hundred via 1868), in simple terms as we now be attentive to of extra suitable than 800 Kuiper Belt gadgets like Pluto. the 2nd we come across a planet with existence on it no one will think of approximately ineffective rocks on the fringes of our image voltaic equipment, our horizons might have have been given extra suitable and our interest been diverted.

Answer 6

i say once you name it a planet, its a planet especially after decades and billions of people learning that it is a planet... you just cant jerk the rug out from under everybody like that. If you want to change your mind Too Bad... PLUTO IS A PLANET!!! It was WAY Before I was born and I learned in school right along with everyone else on the Planet Earth Pluto IS a Planet. and people can reclassify all they want,black holes, quasars, nebulas,Just about anything else in the universe, add planets, rename planets in other solar systems if you want, but don't screw with Pluto or the other planets in This solar system!

Answer 7

By definition, "a planet is a large celestial body in the solar system that revolves around the sun and shines by reflected light". Moreover, Pluto revolves in the same direction as all the other planets - in a counter-clockwise direction when viewed from the same location in space. I firmly disagree with designating Pluto as anything other than a planet. According to the definition, its origin is irrelevant.

Answer 8

They should have left it a ******* planet. The wrath of Pluto will be severe. I predict the "satellite" crashes into Iraq within ten years.

Answer 9

pluto is a frickin comet! it just was knocked out of orbit and broke in half. pluto also crosses orbits with neptune so it shouldnt have been a planet anyhow.

you can not prove me wrong

Answer 10

The answer to your question is: Anyone who knows nothing about science.

Pluto was re-classified.

Re-classification goes on all the time in science, as new knowledge comes to light.

tell us how it is possible for anyone who has hardly any knowledge of the subject to say they disagree with a re-classification.

Come on. That is real stupid, isn't it? It's like you saying you disagree with a Velociraptor being called a Velociraptor.

What qualification have you got that says you could argue with scientists?

Get a life, please.