Scientists: New 'planet' bigger than Pluto

[derby378]

German astrophysicists have concluded a space body located in the outer reaches of the solar system is 435 miles (700 kilometers) larger than Pluto, the smallest planet.

Their research puts more pressure on the International Astronomical Union (IAU) to classify the object as the 10th planet in our solar system.

"UB313 is decidedly larger than Pluto," said University of Bonn Professor Frank Bertoldi, whose team's findings will be published in Thursday's journal Nature.

The object, tentatively named 2003 UB313, is an icy body that lies beyond the planet Neptune.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/space/02/01/tenth.planet/index.html

[htuttle]

1. There are either 8 planets or more than 10 planets

But we should be consistent about it, so 9 planets is most definitely wrong.

[Brotherjohn]

7. Not to start a flame war, but my opinion is that it's all semantics.

Even from a semantic point of view, I suppose you're right in that 9 doesn't really work. If your definition is size, there is at least one bigger object. If it's whether the object is round and has a moon... then what about the newly dicovered object nicknamed Xena (and it's "moon" nicknamed Gabrielle)?

But I recently heard a scientist on NPR saying that it's NOT arbitrary. He said that there IS a specific criterion that makes an object inarguably a planet, and this is it's gravity and size, and the fact that this causes it to take on a spherical shape.

Okay then. So what about Ceres, the largest asteroid? Not only is it spherical, but it's thought that it possibly has frost and even a light atmosphere, and has a (relatively) warm surface. (http://www.solarviews.com/eng/ceres.htm)

My two cents is that there are infinite variables that play into how objects have coalesced and formed in our (and any) solar system. Where we decide to draw the line as to what's a planet and what's not is our arbitrary distinction. We're trying to place an "all or none" classification scheme on something that's really a continuum.

The same thing is largely true of biology.

[MisterP]

13. it's a social and not a scientific class--like "fruit" and "vegetable"

[The Sushi Bandit]

2. a planet should be judged on its gravity!

lets say if its less then one tenth earths pull it should be a "Planetesimal"

[Ediacara]

3. Isn't gravity a function of mass?

So an icy body could theoretically be larger than a rocky body of the same gravity, right?

[Brotherjohn]

5. And also proportional to the inverse of the radius squared. Therefore...

... even though you'd expect, say, to weigh more on Uranus than Earth, since it has about 14 times more mass... you actually would weigh LESS. You'd weigh about 91% of what you weigh on Earth.
(http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/astronomy/planets/uranus/)

Similarly, although Jupiter could hold 1000 Earth's volume wise, you'd only weigh about 3X as much there.

I have my son's Magic School Bus "Lost in the Solar System" book to thank for recently reminding me of this interesting bit of planetary physics.

[Thor_MN]

11. So technically speaking,

Uranus can't make your ass look fat? or at least weigh more than on Earth...

[mod mom]

4. Just helped my 4th grader with a report on this and thought it was

said to be an ice dwarf. New Horizons mission will know more in 2015 (lets hope there is still life on this planet at that time) when it reaches Pluto.

[xchrom]

6. that's exciting.

bigger than pluto -- wow.

our solar system is getting crowded.

[LifeDuringWartime]

8. they should name it rupert

;)

[cliss]

9. OK, you scientific types:

the Hindus use 2 unknown planets in their Vedic astrology. They are called 'Rahu' and 'Ketu'. They are called "shadowy planets" which have never been seen, but they use them nonetheless. Western astrologers do not use these planets in their astrology calculations.

In fact, Rahu has caused me some trouble in the past.

Question: is there maybe some truth to these planets? Could it possibly be this one?

[Blackthorn]

10. I am not at all familar with Vedic astronomy...

But considering the size of the planet, and its distance from the sun, would make it incredibly difficult to see with big telescopes and utterly impossible to the naked eye. Even Neptune is invisible to the naked eye. Unless Vedic astronomers had access to technology similar to that of today, then this 'planet' is unlikely to be one of them.

On the other hand, there are many stories and rumours of civilisations past that deal with a 10th planet, most notably for me in Zecharia Stichin's work, the planet Nibiru. He says its a large planet, on a highly elliptical orbit, which at aphelion swings between Earth and Mars, and at perhelion is out far past Pluto; an orbit of some 3600 years. I think this planet, if it exists, is far more likely to fit the bill for one of the Vedic's shadowy planet.

[manic expression]

12. Well,

the poster mentioned that they have never been seen, so mere sight was obviously not the way they were discovered. How the Vedic astronomers were able to find this, I have absolutely no idea, but even they would not claim to have seen the planets.

[cliss]

14. Wow, thanks so much

for that awesome info. I'll look up the planet 'Nibiru' on Google.

[Psephos]

17. Here's some more mystery planet fun :-)

http://www.unmuseum.org/planetx.htm

Read up on Planet Vulcan.

You might also enjoy the results of a google search for Nemesis, the dark twin star of the Sun.

Peace.

[cliss]

19. Very nice website, thanks.

Here's another tidbit about the Hindus: they believe our solar system is moving towards its stellar "twin", a star which apparently is bombarding us with beneficial rays, moving us towards better times. As we move closer to this stellar twin, we will become more enlightened. Sounds good to me.

We are apparently located on one of the arms of the Milky Way Galaxy, and we're moving towards the center (?). I've also read that some people feel that We Earthlings actually came from another planet, and were just dumped here!

The Dogon Tribe in Africa believe that humans actually came from Sirius, the Dog Star. Who knows?

[Warren DeMontague]

15. Bullshit.

It's not in the bible, so it doesn't exist.

[Posteritatis]

16. This line really gets old after the first 600,000,000 times... (n/t)

[entanglement]

18. Time to party, the earth has a new sibling!

:party: