If you could participate in a hot debate over the need for a new definition of a planet...
What would be the main point you'd argue? Would you be for or against it?, why and why not?, and where is your stance in the controversy it's created surrounding Pluto? Was demoting Pluto...the right decision?, why or not?
(Not asking for an essay, this is part of a research project)
2007-11-20 09:56:35 · 2 answers · asked by Emocide Organ 3 in Education & Reference ➔ Homework Help
The current definition is pretty good. Until there are some more different types of mass orbiting the sun I don't think it really needs revision.
Pluto was okay being defined as a planet until other Kuyper Belt objects were found, redefining it's status as a KBO or as a planetoid (demotion) is just fine.
2007-11-20 10:18:59 · answer #1 · answered by Monkeyboi 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To borrow a quote, "Size matters", and ol' pluto was found "lacking". Orbit stability also counts, and too many eccentricities thereof won't get you into the club, old boy.
2007-11-20 10:02:21 · answer #2 · answered by Stephen H 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋