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

Those who have some background information, or just know enough...
A suggestion of a tenth planet was brought up. However, it seems in this day & age. we couldn't just declare anything a planet, but there was never any official meaning for a planet, or for celestial bodies in general, so how would we know how to tell?,

How do you feel about the events that transpired?, How do you feel about the decision and scientific definition they came up with, does it make sense?, Do you approve of the way they handled the situation and the method they used in reaching their solution? (voting=politics=not science)
Do you think anyone will be affected by this?, who will be affected the most?
Why do you think it's caused as much of a controversy as it has?, what exactly is so special about Pluto anyway (once deemed "the plucky little planet that could)

Okay, that's not an essay prompt, I just want responses, & i'm trying to lead you into your answer...
Thanks!!!

2007-11-15 10:58:14 · 8 answers · asked by Emocide Organ 3 in Science & Mathematics Astronomy & Space

8 answers

The same thing happened in the 1850s. Four new planets had been discovered between Mars and Jupiter very early in the 1800s. Nothing after that for 50 years.
Suddenly, a whole bunch as telescopes improved. The planet status wa revoked for the four objects, which became the first Minor Planets (a.k.a. asteroids).

The same thing was happening again. We are discovering more and more objects similar to Pluto and in the same general area. It's like 1850 all over again.

They had the same problem, they solved it the same way. Sounds very consistent (= scientific) to me.

It was not long after Pluto's discovery that just about every astronomer on this planet realised that it was not what it first had been thought to be. Still, as long as it was alone in its part of the sky, it did not hurt to have it in the list.

At least, it helped start yet another category of planetoids (dwarf planets).

2007-11-15 11:12:46 · answer #1 · answered by Raymond 7 · 0 0

Personally, I think it should still be a planet. But I'm not an astrophysicist. And I've heard that the issue is being redebated (in scientific forums, not just here).
I think that Pluto was demoted because it was decided that a planet had to be able to clear its orbit of other stuff and Pluto is too small apparently to do that.
Let's feel sorry for the Lowell Observatory out in Flagstaff. Here all these years, it's been hailed as the place where the ninth planet was discovered and now all they did was find the ninth rock or something like that.

2007-11-15 19:06:35 · answer #2 · answered by Garrett 4 · 1 0

I think the vote was casted WITHOUT the presence of about 4/5ths of the organization that held the gathering.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Astronomical_Union



next time...........
the 27th General Assembly, planned for 2009 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, is when the organization gets together again, the vote might be up for change

that is If everyone who is a part of IAU can show up in Brazil. thats an expensive ticket, and the main reason so many scientist couldn't make it to the last (2006) convention

for direct info I linked to the "process section": a MUST read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_definition_of_planet#Process

many scientist refuse to adhere to the new definition.
http://www.planetwaves.net/contents/wsj.html

Neptune should fall into the same category as Pluto since it has not technically "cleared the neighborhood" because of Pluto.

This might be the argument that re initiates a change in the definitions of a planet in 2009


SCREW THE WHALES!!!! SAVE PLUTO

2007-11-15 19:11:21 · answer #3 · answered by Mercury 2010 7 · 1 0

You know Sailor Moon, their is a Sailor Pluto who guards the gate of time... if it's not a planet, it ruins Sailor Moon. Their is a Sailor Soldier for each planet, what do you do with Sailor Pluto???

It needs to stay a planet for the sake of Sailor Moon.

2007-11-15 20:36:15 · answer #4 · answered by Randy K 1 · 0 0

I don't find the change in definition relevant in any way, shape, or form. It doesn't change ANY physical reality, merely a point of semantics and definition.

2007-11-15 19:03:47 · answer #5 · answered by Stephen H 5 · 0 0

i think that its not a planet but what do I know man I'm just in 7th grade just go with what ever you think

2007-11-15 19:02:56 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I think it's pointless to argue
not like any of us are actually going there anyway

2007-11-15 19:00:41 · answer #7 · answered by T Leeves 6 · 0 1

i think it sucks cuz now i cant use
My
Very
Educated
Mother
Just
Showed
Us
Nine
Planets

you know, mercury, venus, etc...

2007-11-15 19:01:59 · answer #8 · answered by Abira 4 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers