So, should Pluto be a planet?

[Bill McBlueState]

See CatWoman's thread and the CNN story about the International Astronomical Union and its debate over Pluto's status as a planet.

What do we think on DU?

And after you vote -- for extra credit you can post your definition of a planet. :)

[corkhead]

1. No, but maybe he should run as an independent too, against droopy dog

vs

[MrCoffee]

2. Yes, otherwise My Very Energetic Mother Just Sent Us Nine...

what? tell me! What will my very energetic mother send?

edited to make me look less stupid.

[Bill McBlueState]

5. noodles?

I'd rather get a plate full o' noodles than nine pickles. But that's just me. But if the "P" stands for pies, I could go for some pie.

But how did your aunt get involved?

[MrCoffee]

8. Mostly by me being dumb.

[RoseMead]

3. I think we need to fix this planet first

Before worrying about the status of the rest of the solar system.

I know, I'm no fun.

[Bill McBlueState]

6. don't worry

We can do both.

[Warren DeMontague]

28. Really? We can't even attempt to understand the rest of the universe

until we fix ALL of our problems down here....?

Wow.

Hey- here's a crazy, wacky thought. Perhaps by learning as much as we can about everything, we may gain the knowledge and insight through which we can solve some of those problems.

Who are the people who are most informed about, for instance, Global Warming? The Flat-Earthers and Neo-Luddites in the Bush Administration, for instance, or NASA?

[tocqueville]

4. no, if you relate it to the size of Uranus

sorry, I just had to...

[MrCoffee]

7. Poor Uranus, the butt of all the solar system jokes.

[deaniac21]

33. How about the Uranus Corp?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uUStHBRDwQ&search=groove%20tube

[kenny blankenship]

9. If Pluto can be a planet then why would I call Earth a planet too?

Pluto getting to be a planet just destroys the institution of planetary definition and would probably lead to man on dog sex.
Sure call Pluto a planet, we'll just chalk it up as another "liberal", demon-possessed attack on the sustaining traditions of Judeo-Christian society.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

11. LOL

Right you are, Ken. :thumbsup:

[mcscajun]

10. Yes. If they want to start some new nomenclature, fine.

I'll go to my grave calling Pluto a planet. Hell, I still slip and call the apatosaurus a brontosaurus.

Anyway, my definition of a planet is a spherical space body in constant, predictable orbit around a solar body, with or without orbiting satellites of its own.

That definition may yet mean I have to recognize one or more additional "new" planets, but please don't expect me to remember them. :)

[Bill McBlueState]

18. yes, you'd have quite a few planets

A pretty significant chunk of the asteroids become planets under your definition.

That's fine with me, but a lot of grade school kids are gonna hate you for all the extra memorization. :)

[mcscajun]

20. Hmmm...if millions of school kids hate me, does that mean I get to

be Infamous and Remembered?

I always wanted to make my mark on Science and Humanity. :)

I'd propose categorization: the Major Planets (which the kiddies would have to memorize) and the minor planets (which they wouldn't, except for extra credit).

[Warren DeMontague]

31. Here's the problem:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuiper_belt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:TheKuiperBelt_75AU_Large.svg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:TheKuiperBelt_75AU_All.svg

By ANY stretch, you're gonna have a LOT of "major planets". Unless you say "major" means, "was called a planet before 1950"

[mcscajun]

37. Your last is exactly what I mean.

Proximity comes into play here, as well.

Anything found outside Pluto can go into the category of minor, or outer, or whatever.

[Der Blaue Engel]

12. Only if Xena gets to be one too

(And keep the name of Xena, cuz that's bitchin'.) :D

[derby378]

36. I think the IAU won't keep the Xena nomenclature

If Xena is judged to be a planet, it'll eventually be given the name of a Roman god or goddess.

[CJCRANE]

13. Why do you hate Pluto?!!

[Anarcho-Socialist]

14. No!

No reason.

[Bill McBlueState]

15. I like this definition:

A planet is an object orbiting a star that is the dynamically dominant body in its orbit.

(That means it's the big cheese in its neighborhood -- it's the most massive body within any reasonable distance.)

Defined that way, Pluto is out. There are just too many similarly large objects nearby for Pluto to be considered dominant: Sedna, Quaoar, and apparently several others. This leaves us with eight definite planets and a number of other classifications of smaller bodies in the solar system.

Having said all that -- Pluto is Pluto, and our label for it will always be arbitrary. Scientifically, it's not that important what we decide to call it.

[BlueJazz]

22. I would add....

A planet is an object orbiting a star that is at least 1000 kilometers in diameter and
does not intersect the orbit of more than one other planet.

[sui generis]

25. I like the categorization of "planetary body"

and type, making both Pluto and Xena ice dwarf planetary bodies.

Until someone is selling real estate on Pluto though, who really cares, and what does it matter?

[Kindigger]

16. What is a planet?

I had no idea there was no official definition of "planet".

I always thought if something wasn't a comet, star, moon, whatever....it was a planet. :shrug:

On edit (just checking):

All of the above plus if it has a moon.

[mcscajun]

19. There isn't one, and thereby hangs the tale...

...the debate is over that very topic, with the fate of Pluto as a subtopic.

[Bill McBlueState]

24. that's what the controversy's all about

Right now, there is no official definition. For most of history, people thought it was obvious what was a planet and what wasn't. But as we discover more new objects -- both in the outer reaches of our own solar system and orbiting other suns entirely -- a huge gray area has developed. Objects in this gray area, including Pluto, are in some ways similar to the eight major planets, but are much, much smaller and have somewhat different compositions.

The International Astronomical Union is debating whether to officially define the term, and whether to construct the definition in such a way that includes Pluto.

Of course, the IAU is a bunch of scientists. It's not like they have their own goon squad to enforce any decisions they make. People will go on calling Pluto whatever they want.

[BuyingThyme]

17. The kid pictured below is giving the finger to Pluto

because he's confused about its status as a planet.



Webster's defines a planet as a terrestrial body which revolves around Candy Crowley.

[Greyhound]

21. I thought Mickey's dog was Gay!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[mcscajun]

23. Why do you hate America?

Somebody had to say it.

:rofl:

[TechBear_Seattle]

26. If yes, then there are a lot of other planets out there

Sedna, Xena, a few others that have been discovered in the last couple of years. If they aren't planets, then neither is Pluto (Xena is actually bigger and has a more planet-like orbit.)

Edit Oops, Xena (officially 2003 UB313) is the bigger planet, not Sedna.

[1monster]

27. But, if Pluto is demoted from Planet status it will throw off the lyrics

of my FAVORITE Blues Clues song!

Oh, the Sun is very hot.
Mercury's hot too.
Venus is the brightest planet.
And Earth is home to me and you.
Mars is the red one.
Jupiter's most wide.
Saturn has those icy rings.
And Uranus spins on its side.
Neptune's very windy.
And Pluto's most small.
Oh, we wanted to name the planets,
And now we've named them all.

[Warren DeMontague]

29. The only halfway decent argument I've seen for "yes" is the poster

who said "it should be grandfathered in".

Beyond that, I think it's GOOD for people to realize that the models and maps they were given in grade school of how the Solar System and the Universe are set up may be outdated and in need of updating. Far, far too many people in this country are blissfully unaware of how science works, and it shows - for instance, in the seemingly widespread belief that "the jury is still out" on Evolution and Global Warming. Science doesn't operate on popularity contests. For instance, if most people want the genesis account of creation to be true, that doesn't make it any more valid.. Same with Pluto. The fact that people are attached to the idea of Pluto as a planet doesn't change the vast amounts of information we've learned in recent years about the Kuiper belt and related objects.

Look, "planet" is kind of an arbitrary definition- but I think this discussion is educational because it causes (forces?) some folks to realize that our solar system -and our universe- is far more complex than they may have previously understood, and it should ideally remind -or teach- folks about how science works; namely, by constantly updating explanations, theories, and maps of reality as new data comes in.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuiper_belt

[leftofthedial]

30. No. the earth is flat

and gawd didn't say anything about any planets in the bible.

[Warren DeMontague]

32. What's astounding to me is that these threads always seem to bring out

at least one or two genuinely pissed-off-at-science-in-general posters.

"Why should we bother with any of this stuff, ever? Especially when we have problems here on Earth... like, for instance, my shower curtain, which is covered with mildew!"

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[derby378]

35. Definition of a planet? Maybe we need a "features test" for now

Here's some ideas:

Density and Mass - A planet must be large and/or massive enough to be round or obloid in shape due to its own gravity, but not so large and/or massive that it triggers nuclear reactions in its core, which would make such a planet a small star. Damage from subsequent collisions with comets, asteroids, etc. would not change the status of such an object unless said planet was disintegrated by the impact.

Axial Rotation and Magnetosphere - A planet should rotate on an axis and (ideally) produce its own magnetosphere. Whether or not Pluto has a magnetic field is still unknown. Orientation of axial rotation is irrelevant, as demonstrated by the rotation of Uranus on a horizontal axis rather than a vertical one.

Ability to Sustain an Atmosphere - A planet does not necessarily need to have an atmosphere, but it should be able to sustain one if conditions are right. Mercury, despite the fact that it's so close to the Sun, does possess a very tenuous atmosphere consisting of helium and a few other gases.

Orbit - A planet should maintain a fairly stable and predictable orbit, even if such an orbit is highly eccentric and/or elliptical. This, however, is not enough by itself to designate an object as a planet, as some asteroids have relatively stable orbits as well.

That's just a few for starters...

[Swamp Rat]

38. Pluto should be grandfathered in and remain a planet.