|
|
Subject:
Pluto's Demotion
Category: Science > Astronomy Asked by: mongolia-ga List Price: $5.00 |
Posted:
24 Aug 2006 08:40 PDT
Expires: 23 Sep 2006 08:40 PDT Question ID: 759099 |
Did Pluto REALLY deserve to be demoted? (Planet that is not the dog) Mongolia |
|
Subject:
Re: Pluto's Demotion
Answered By: keystroke-ga on 24 Aug 2006 09:52 PDT |
I believe this will answer your question. http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4912714,00.html Pluto no longer being a planet is only part of our definition. As has been famously quoted before. "A rose by any other name will smell just as sweet". Likewise, even if Pluto is a planet or is not a planet, Pluto will still remain as Pluto and will continue to orbit the Sun regardless of what title we deem fits its purpose. I think at the end of the day the demotion and thoughts of whether pluto should be a planet or not is down to personal belief. I however feel that Pluto could be a planet, even though it is made mainly of ice, it has 1 possibly 3 moons that orbit it. Doesn't that make it a planet? I am not part of the group that decides these things so anything I feel is neither here nor there. --Keystroke-ga |
|
Subject:
Re: Pluto's Demotion
From: jack_of_few_trades-ga on 24 Aug 2006 08:50 PDT |
<sniffle sniffle> It really is a sad day for Disney... I mean for the solar system. But it's true, Pluto just didn't deserve the title of Planet. Pluto is significantly smaller than other planets, there are several moons larger than Pluto. Pluto also has an orbit that is very different from any other planets. The best case scenario that I would have given to Pluto is that it could be put into a new category of minor planets... I think that was somewhat the official decision that the scientists came up with. But Pluto will never again be part of the most prestigious group of major planets. |
Subject:
Re: Pluto's Demotion
From: fstokens-ga on 24 Aug 2006 10:46 PDT |
The main problem with defining Pluto as a "planet" is that any definition of "planet" which includes Pluto would also include a lot of other objects which are not commonly thought of as planets. So astronomers had 3 options: 1) define "planet" broadly, including Pluto and many others 2) define "planet" narrowly, excluding Pluto 3) define "planet" narrowly, but make a special exception for Pluto None of these are perfect, but I think that demoting Pluto (option 2 above) is the best choice. |
Subject:
Re: Pluto's Demotion
From: pinkfreud-ga on 24 Aug 2006 11:26 PDT |
Maybe poor little Pluto can get a job in some neighboring Universe. |
Subject:
Re: Pluto's Demotion
From: jack_of_few_trades-ga on 24 Aug 2006 12:25 PDT |
Pink, that is very thoughtful of you. I'm sure Pluto appreciates people watching out for his well being... However, Pluto is about 5 light hours from our sun... yet about 4 light years from the next closest sun. I don't think he would last long with that kind of commute. (I think my 20 minute commute is bad enough) |
Subject:
Re: Pluto's Demotion
From: pinkfreud-ga on 24 Aug 2006 12:30 PDT |
Gee, Jack, don'tcha watch any sci-fi shows? Pluto can get there in a jiffy once the Universal Transit Authority opens a wormhole. |
Subject:
Re: Pluto's Demotion
From: myoarin-ga on 24 Aug 2006 12:56 PDT |
Hmmm? I wasn't listening too carefully to the news, but I thought the announcement followed the suggestion mentioned on this site: keep Pluto [good for the information in lots of existing books] and add three new planets: http://www.baltimoresun.com/features/lifestyle/bal-to.planets23aug23,0,7916413.story?coll=bal-artslife-today |
Subject:
Re: Pluto's Demotion
From: jack_of_few_trades-ga on 24 Aug 2006 13:06 PDT |
Indeed Pluto has been booted. It is now a dwarf planet along with several other sun-orbiters. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,210275,00.html |
Subject:
Re: Pluto's Demotion
From: pinkfreud-ga on 24 Aug 2006 13:28 PDT |
If Douglas Adams (of "Hitchhiker's Guide" fame) were still around, I bet he'd have a lot of fun with the Pluto story. I can imagine Zaphod Beeblebrox organizing a protest and threatening that if Pluto is not reinstated, he'll steal the Kuiper Belt, and Kuiper's pants will fall down. |
Subject:
Re: Pluto's Demotion
From: mongolia-ga on 24 Aug 2006 13:50 PDT |
If you read that most up to date fountain of knowledge wikipedia , you will find the latest on Pluto: "On August 24, 2006, however, the previous draft was reversed, according to the newly passed rule, Pluto was demoted from planetary status to a dwarf planet. There are three main conditions for an object to be called a 'planet', according to the IAU resolution. The first is that the object must be in orbit around a star, but not be a star itself. Secondly, the object must be massive enough to be a sphere by its own gravitational force. Thirdly, it must have cleared the neighborhood around its orbit. Pluto fails to meet these conditions but will act as a prototype for a yet to be named category of Trans-Neptunian objects" Regards for now Mongolia PS Clyde Tombaugh must be rolling in his grave! |
Subject:
Re: Pluto's Demotion
From: denco-ga on 24 Aug 2006 15:32 PDT |
Perhaps the rest of our solar system can maintain a plutonic relationship. |
Subject:
Re: Pluto's Demotion
From: pinkfreud-ga on 24 Aug 2006 16:29 PDT |
When I first spotted this question, for a moment I thought its title was "Pluto's Demolition." And I said to myself "Oh, no! Are those astronomy guys so annoyed by Pluto that they've gone and blown it up?" |
If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by emailing us at answers-support@google.com with the question ID listed above. Thank you. |
Search Google Answers for |
Google Home - Answers FAQ - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy |