Science has decided Pluto isn't a true planet, right?

Question

We can see distant galaxy's with the huble space telescope, but we still ain't sure what pluto is! Is it ice or rock, could it be a large space station built by the Gods who flew in many ancient cultures writings! Unexplained objects seen by thousands, 98% are considered hoaxes but what about the other 2%? I've seen things myself in my long years, once I watched a explosion in space it was quite a sight! Five of us seen it but we were kids and the local military denied the possibility, we never mentioned it to any one so some adults must have seen it and asked, I suppose!
We can fly to the moon but we can't stand on the bottom of our own oceans! Or can we? Yes the pressures would be strong but how much pressure can titanium with hold!
I still say with all my mind that it would be stupid to think this ball of dust we live on is the only source of life in all of space!
So are we alone? And yes I asked R&S on purpose!

The soviet subs that you speak of had double hulls! With a air gap between the hulls!
But think walk 2500 ft from your hut and look back at it thats all the deeper anyones been!
Course thats not true in the 50's they used diving spheres to dive really really deep!

1978, Hm could be, I'dve been like 14 think it was in the fall though! East of Kansas! Just around 10 pm

Answer 1

I think the decision to reclassify Pluto had more to do with a scientific analysis of its orbit in relation to this solar system than on its composition. But as to your second question, I too don't think we're "alone" (though we are quite lonely), and like yourself when I was a young teen I saw what I thought to be an explosion in space (winter 1978 if memory serves) but everyone else tried to convince me it was something else.

Answer 2

That which Pluto happens to be is entirely in the minds of those who'd like to make such a determination. To me, size isn't everything. Pluto orbits the sun, and not only is capable of having moons, but DOES have moons. That's more than enough for me to always regard it as a planet.

As for whether or not we're alone --

Consider this: our own galaxy has around 300 billion suns. And we already know that some of the very nearby ones have planets. Thus, it's very likely that planets aren't anomalous in the universe, but rather, are probably very common. And the known universe has hundreds of billions of galaxies, which have hundreds of billions of stars.

Consider: the known universe is probably about 20 billion years old. The earth, only about 1/5 that age. Suppose that millions of stars having even older planets have planets like ours -- or unlike ours, but still able to support some sort of lifeforms. What are the chances that some of those planets might have civilizations a million or more years old? (Remember, a million is only 1/1,000th of a billion. Odds certainly would seem to favor there being a LOT of planets with civilizations a million or more years older than ours.)

SO -- consider this: Just 150 years or so ago, the Industial Revolution in our world was underway, but the electronic revolution was still decades away. Mid-19th-century folks couldn't have even begun to envision jet planes and computers. What will another 100 years bring? 500 years? 1,000 years? Or -- how about a thousand times a thousand years... a million years?

And assuming that we'll have started to explore the universe LONG before then... how will WE study less-advanced worlds? By making ourselves known to them? I'll bet not.

For US, here on earth, to seriously think it likely that we're alone (or even the most advanced, if we're not), requires a HUGE dose of arrogance on our part.

Or living in denial? (It's painful to think that this latter is probably the case for many. Why would ANYONE want to live in denial of that?)

All of that having been said, I truly wish that someday soon, a ship from some 'way-advanced-beyond-ours civilization touches down in New York's Central Park at noontime, and causes all the nay-sayers to eat a BUNCH of humble pie. (And puts an end forever to any possible government cover-ups.)

Answer 3

I guess I am just supposed to pick one question out of all that to answer?

Ok then, I'll tackle the titanium then...it depends. How large is the vehicle you're planning to build? How thick will the hull be? These are both important factors that will need to be addressed before a precise answer can be given. Some Soviet submarines have titanium hulls and have been known to go to depths of 2500 feet (maybe more). Unfortunately, titanium is less flexible than steel and will become brittle after a few dives to that depth, meaning the submarine can't risk going as deep next time.

Hope this helps!

Answer 4

Get real.

We are sure what Pluto is. We are not sure what label to put on it. The problem is one of size. There are a number of Pluto-like objects further out than Pluto and the problem is that they constitute a continuum of sizes running all the way down to comets. While we have not found any larger than Pluto, that may just be a matter of time.

Thus Pluto and, by definition, all they Kuiper belt objects, have been demoted. They are no longer labeled planets. This is not the first time this has happened. The asteroids were originally called planets as they were discovered until there got to be too many of them.

As far as the rest of your ramble. Aliens exist but UFOs are not alien objects. Alien visitation demands faster than light travel and if you had that you wouldn't be acting like UFOs and aliens are said to. It's the god problem. If god was god, god wouldn't need to hide and only appear in remote places to primative people. The same could be said for aliens.

As far as the bottom of the ocean, we have been there, although more people have been to the moon than to the bottom of the deepest trench. It is easier to hold in air at 14 pounds per square inch that is trying to escape into a vacuum than it is to hold out water at 15,751 pounds per square inch that is trying to get into your diving bell.

On the other hand, aliens do exist. I agree with you that the chances that life only arose once in the entire universe are so small as to be dismissable.

Answer 5

Technically, according to the definitions of planets recently released; with the criterium of planets, there's not a single planet in our solar system.......We can't even decide what really makes a planet. You'd think that that we'd at LEAST have that figured out before we tried to venture to the furthest reaches of space.

To answer your final question, I think it's arrogant to believe that we're the only life forms in the universe. It would be a cosmic waste of space if we were. However, I don't believe that we would be of any interest to a more highly evolved space-faring race.

Answer 6

Eris > Pluto


The Pluto thing just means we have revised our definitions as we discover more. Sometimes more information means that the information we have is less tidy.

Our reclassification of Pluto was because continuing to call it a planet would have opened up too many other objects to being called planets, and we can't have that.

Answer 7

Good point, but think of this, I heard that a planet categorized by size and if that is so then wouldn't moons around Jupiter and Saturn and others fall into that category even though they don't circle the sun?
As for extra terrestrials sure why not.

Answer 8

Pluto is now classified as a dwarf planet, and one of the Kuiper Belt Objects. I'm not entirely sure what else you're aiming for by your question.

Answer 9

It is possible that we are alone. Our type of solar system seems rare, maybe unique.

If not, we are most vulnerable, especially if other live is as competitive as our own terrestrial life is.

Answer 10

Yor logic flow needs much to be desired. Pluto has nothing to do with aliens. So what if we aren't alone?