ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



The lighter side of Pluto

Posted: Thursday, August 24, 2006 5:55 PM by Alan Boyle

Pluto's not a planet? That may be the verdict for now - but scientists, teachers and the general public will be digesting the International Astronomical Union's definition of planethood for years. Astronomers were quick to raise objections, and the debate over the worlds on the solar system's edge is sure to be revisited. So for now, think of plucky little Pluto's predicament as a classic "teachable moment."

That's how Carl Benoit, editorial director for Illinois-based Learning Resources, sees it. A week ago, the folks at Learning Resources were worrying about how they would rework their teaching aids - including solar system floormats, solar system stamps, their Planet Quest game and inflatable planet sets - to cope with a 12-planet solar system. Now they're wondering what to do about Pluto.

Benoit said the company would review their product line toward the end of the year and decide what needs to be done.

"What I'll recommend is that we'll obviously do the eight planets, and probably do something to label these dwarf planets to make sure everything's correct," he told me. "If I were to say today, would I recommend that? Yes, I would. But from what I'm reading, there could be 120 other dwarf planets."

Even if Pluto isn't on the official list of solar system planets, it may still stay in the educational lineup, Benoit said.

"I think it'd be a good idea to keep Pluto around and explain that this has been a planet for 76 years," he said. "It becomes an educational process, to explain to kids why it was a planet, and now why it's not. ... That's the kind of critical thinking that kids need to be doing when they do science."

That philosophical bent extended even to Patricia Tombaugh, the 93-year-old widow of Clyde Tombaugh, Pluto's discoverer. She told The Associated Press that the IAU's verdict was "disappointing in a way, and confusing."

"I don't know just how you handle it. It kind of sounds like I just lost my job," she told AP from Las Cruces, N.M. "But I understand science is not something that just sits there. It goes on. Clyde finally said before he died, 'It's there. Whatever it is. It is there.'"

She provided yet another aphorism to the Reuters news service: "Clyde would have said, 'Science is a progressive thing, and if you're going to be a scientist and put your neck out, you're apt to have it bitten upon.' He was a good scientist, and he knew how to judge things."

Reuters also gathered reaction from the National Air and Space Museum in Washington. Eleven-year-old Michael O'Sullivan, visiting from Garden City, N.Y., was amazed to hear the news. "Seriously! Pluto is not a planet?" he asked.

After a moment of thinking, he told the reporter: "At least Pluto the dog doesn't have to compete with the planet anymore."

The Disney cartoon canine has often crossed paths with the planet - in fact, the story goes that Walt Disney named the character Pluto to capitalize on the news of Tombaugh's discovery. During the IAU's crucial session, astronomers reportedly waved Pluto plush toys around to demonstrate their solidarity with the onetime planet.

Disney returned the love, according to Reuters: "Pluto is taking this news in stride," Disney Co. spokesman Donn Walker said, "and we have no reason to believe he might bite an astronomer."

If the decision sticks, schoolkids will have one less planet to memorize - but they'll also have to come up with new mnemonics to replace the old standbys, such as "My Very Eager Mother Just Sewed Us New Pajamas." We delved into this burning issue when it looked as if Xena might be added to the list of planets, but you're welcome to revisit the issue, either by submitting your comments here, or adding to the more than 1,000 postings on MSNBC's message board.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Long live Pluto!!
Yes children... and today we're going to learn how to send our crayon-written, hate-mail to those evil, good for nothing, high and mighty IAU people at:

IAU - UAI
98bis Bd Arago
FR - 75014 Paris
FRANCE

…and once they figure out where their desk is again, they'll reconsider how their definition doesn't hold sway in systems whose planets have been recently formed, where recent collisions have caused new asteroid belts to form, where large worlds exist well outside of a 40 AU debris-free inner zone, and where near misses of planetary bodies have cast once stable orbiting planets out into a deep and highly elliptical orbit that is unlikely to be “cleared” for the next 100 million years.
This has happened before in history, when Ceres was discovered in orbit between Mars and Jupiter, it was considered the missing planet until more discoveries lead to the recognition of it and its neighbors as asteroids. Until the general public comes around and finally relinquishes the emotional pull Pluto has on it, though, it will remain in most everyone's mind a planet.
Since humans first labeled those little lights in the night sky it was obvious that there were differences between them.  The lights that moved were named “planetes” by the Greeks, or wanderers.  With the development of telescopes, more moving lights were discovered.  Shortly before the 20th century the fact that all the lights moved, albeit at highly different rates, was discovered.  The one constant in astronomy as in all others sciences is change.  To accept this new pronouncement as the last word is to ignore the reality of science.  I am glad to see that Mrs. Tombaugh is at comfort with this.
I met Clyde Tombaugh, the discover of Pluto, almost 30 years ago at a astronomy conference.  I found him to be a very bright and somewhat funny man. After reading his story about the discovery of the 9th planet I was inspired to build my first telescope.  Now these many years later I believe that demoting Pluto to a less than planetary status is wrong and certainly downplays the drama and status of his discovery.

I believe my deceased friend is now rolling over in his grave.  Thanks a lot, IAU!
My students had always learned "My very energetic mother just served us nine pizzas."  Now what?  Please remember when naming any new planets to use letters and not just numbers.  Then we can make up another sentence to learn the planets and how they are situated around the sun.
This has always been an easy matter to me because I look on the astronomical picture site sponsored by NASA, and when I look at Pluto I see Snow Dwarf because there are speculations upon defining a planet.  1. Does it have a moon?  If so does it revolve around Pluto or does Pluto revolve around it?  2. Does it have a planetary core?  If so, does it have a type of atmosphere?  3. Lastly does it rotate enough to create a magnetic field that sustains a type of atmosphere?  These are all the questions that will be asked in the future and present time within the next 5 years for those rocket scientists that lack a bit of immagination.  But I consider Pluto a Semi-Planet because of it's two moons Nix and Hydra and its size.  Its smallness is why I call it a Semi-planet not a planet.  To better explain I consider aplanet large enough to have an atmosphere while I call a Semi-Planet to small to have an antmosphere and is not economically resourceful in my opinion
How about...

My very energetic mother just served us nothing!
Pluto's feelings have been hurt; Pluto is sad!  My 10 year old daughter is FURIOUS about this; I'm thinking of sending her on a field trip to IAU/UAI as she's already written and sent them a letter...
I was thinking the same thing as Thom , Also i would recommend email iau@iap.fr their public email to say that you wont be listening to them , and that we are very disappointed that only 2500 people can declare an universal decision and believe that you should take EVERYONES decision into context . Any real decision should be based upon at the representation of every institute , school , company and astronomer Amateur and Professional alike... 25% , well then I declare the world is flat , the sun is made from biological waste , and there is 1 planet in this solar system all in favor say "yea"
Neptune must be demoted as a planet as it did not clear its orbit of Pluto, even if it is a "dwarf planet" its still a sizeable object that crosses its path. I guess now Neptune is just a big gas sphere. How could scientists pass such a weak definition that is defeated by simple reasoning? These people are not rational.
How about...

"Michael visits every Monday, just stays until Noon."
This was a common pre-Pluto mnemonic.

Or if grade school teachers can't bear the thought of losing the current mnemonic --sometimes I think they're moe attached to that than Pluto itself!-- try this one:
"My very educated mother just served us nachos."

As both a science and space buff and an astrologer, part of me takes this in stride. Science is ever changing and that is a very good thing. Part of me is wringing her hands wondering what the ruling energy of Scorpio is now that we lost PLuto as a planet, but like all things in life, growth and change are necessary. We can't assume that we know everything about the vast cosmos and that new discoveries aren't going to turn old ideas inside out. We need to remember that as things are discovered, the past is rearranged to include the new data. Change is good, people, relax and keep open to learning new things!
Pluto is my very own personal planet!  It was discovered the year I was born!  They can't take my planet away!  I want my planet back!  I read a biography of Clyde Tombaugh some 15 years ago, and it was a thrill to read his incredible life story, largely self-taught for years because of the difficulty of financing college and graduate study--and to learn that he actually made the discovery of Pluto before completing a graduate degree, thanks to the support of the sympathetic staff of the observatory which employed him while he completed his studies.  Awesome!!!
Ahem....has anyone asked Pluto what it wants to be?
I'm a student and this explanation of planet can be much easier if they would define a planet " a circular formation with some chemical compound and in which describe that isn't similar to a comet and asteroid. This so call planet should have some nuclear power in the inner and be able to contain is heat and molecule inside." MANY of the comet contain particle but it travel in a speed and it lose heat...however asteroid rock doesn't have a great amount of gravity in the object. The dwarf planet doesn’t seem to define Pluto because size doesn't define what kind of creation is format.
Not to be a nitpicker here, but Neptune must also fall under the definition of a Dwarf Planet, given that Pluto is considered a Dwarf Planet in that it has not cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit (Pluto crosses the orbit of Neptune.)
therefore the argument can be made that Neptune must be a Dwarf Planet in that it has not cleared the neighborhood arround it's orbit ( Neptune crosses the orbit of Pluto)
Given the above, we must consider both Neptune and Pluto as Dwarf Planets until either, Neptune captures Pluto, at which point Pluto will become a moon of Neptune and Neptune will again become a Planet, or Pluto's orbit no longer crosses Neptunes orbit, at which point both Neptune and Pluto will again be Planets.
1 point of contention, and 1 suggestion

Point of contention - I read an interesting point - Everyone knows there are 7 continents, and continents are inherently a part of geology - so if that is the case, why is Europe and Asia considered seperate continents, but are on the same continental plate?  Anyone take a crack at this?  In fact, this is exactly the point that one of the discoverers of Xena pointed out http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/planetlila/
Scrool down to "Is this object really a planet? Is Pluto a planet? What makes a planet?"

And now the suggestion - why demand a complex definition?  Its quite clear, no matter how you break it down, that there are many different things that orbit the sun, and that even within the contention of planets, there are different types.  Why not simply declare that a planet is any body that orbits a star, and then differentiat between the planet types - clearly the rocky planets are different from the gas giants, as are different from objects in the asteriod belt, and so on - simply leave the concept of planets to be any natural body orbiting a star.  
I think Pluto could have been retained as a planet, with a qualification that is now considered a dwarf/minor planet. After all it has been a part of astronomy for 76 years. All the other small bodies could be classified under a different nomenclature.
I completley Support the IAU's verdict.
Too much time on my hands (and a fairly good thesaurus) produced the following (and several more which are too [explitive] wierd too publish). Use or dicard as you see fit...

Mixed Views Explain My Justifiably Surreal Understanding, (Nes Pah?) or (No?)

Many Verified Extrasolar, Mostly, Jovian Systems Usualy Negate Planetesimals.

Mindful Views Explain Mr. Jason's Simpler Understanding Now.

Mighty, Valiant Endeavours Might Just Settle Uninformed Naysayers.

Just because "something" has been (possibly incorrectly)referred to as "something" for a period of time, does not negate correction and/or standardization. This is not emotional, but scientific and factual. It's not as if someone is saying "I'm sorry son, but you are adopted".
I have to wonder what this will mean to the astrology business... will they be INcluding the dwarf panets in their calculations, or EXcluding Pluto? Gadzooks, the rewriting of books thing again!
Lets by definition, Earth, Jupiter, and Neptune would have to be demoted. Why you ask?

#1 Earth has at last count 801 Near Earth Objects that could fall on the IAU's head at any time and right now not many people would miss, it looks like to me.

#2 Jupiter many thousands of Trojan Astroids, that are in its orbit, both ahead of the planet and behind.

#3 Neptune because it forgot to move another planet out of it's orbit.

Also as someone else stated thier opinion if you want to define a planet with magnetic fields, and core temp. Then we would loose at least one if not 2 planets. They would be Mars and Mercury. I am sorry but if the IAU decided on that I would certinly wish all the astroids would fall on their heads.

"Pluto, which people question whether it is a planet, was discovered by a Unitarian, which people question whether it is a religion" -Chris J
So let me get this straight, if a dozen Jupiter sized objects were all in a wierd but stable orbit around a star, we would call them dwarf planets?

If in a million years we decide to pull Venus out to our orbit to cool off, would we start calling Earth and Venus dwarf planets?

And if a Mars sized object is spotted wandering between stars, as is very possible, we would not know what to call it because it's not orbiting a star?

Come on guys. That's all silly.

Dwarves and Orphans are Planets too, and it doesn't matter where you are or who your neighbor is.

Oh well... so how many Dwarf Planets are there so far? Looks like a pretty big list of potentials. When we get to Seven Dwarves let me know.
Pluto and every other object flying around the sun could be called anything.  The naming and categorizing of things is an always changing part of science.  Planet used to mean a star that moved differently from other stars.  Copernicus changed that.  Now it's a little more specific.  If you are upset with this decision because it does not explain every other conceivable object in space then you shouldn't be happy with how things were before.  This definition will change one day as well.  Science is not as concrete as people would think.  For now Pluto is a dwarf, and one day it might be called an egg salad sandwich just because some scientists want to call it that.  No big deal.
The IAU is a governing body of experts. They are highly educated and they make decisions based on sound and logical reasoning. Like our elected governments making decisions and laws on our behalf, the IAU make laws governing the discoveries and classifications in astronomy. Unlike our elected representatives governing our everyday lives, deciding tax rates and what you can and can't do in your personal life, the IAU makes decisions based only on fact and not on how much they get in kickbacks from companies or what is dictated by religions. We have to respect that their decisions were made for sound reasons even though the media often doesn't report the entirety of the stories.

This decision was indeed a correct one, albeit a little vague (Jupiter also has much debris in its orbit in the form of Trojan asteriods). But, it was the best they could do given internal compromises they had to make. There were several definitions proposed and voted on. Some which may have made a little more sense symantically, but this one was a good one based on fact. Calling Pluto and Pluto-like objects dwarf planets makes much more sense. Keeping something named a planet just for historical reasons is daft. We'd still have an assortment of mystical elements (remember ether?) just for posterity's sake. This is as unscientific as you can get. Teaching the history of Pluto is excellent and I suspect most primary school teachers will incorporate this into the curriculum. It is important to remember the discoveries of the past.

Sending hate mail to the IAU is absurd. By doing so you are destroying the very nature of scientific discovery and classification. Respect their decisions and move on with the new classification of solar system bodies.
I'm fine with the decision.  And for those that say Neptune should also be demoted because it hasn't "cleared" Pluto from it's orbit -- just remember that even though we know Pluto does cross inside the path of Neptune's orbit, that doesn't actually mean it truly INTERSECTS the orbit where Neptune travels.  When Pluto crosses Neptune's orbit it is actually very far above or below the rest of the planets at that time.  If that wasn't the case then Pluto and Neptune would have probably smashed together at some point.  This means that Neptune's orbit HAS been cleared.
 I don't care what anyone says, Pluto has always been a planet to me and always will.  Who voted these people into this power?  NO ONE!  So who says they can decide for everyone else what is and what isn't a planet?  NO ONE!  I bet if they asked the world what they think, the verdict would be very different.  That just goes to show you how little the general public's opinion, in the U.S. and the world, really matters to those who make the rules.  Let freedom ring......Yea, okay.  
Will the IAU rename Uranus to Ouranos?
Less than 500 professional astronomers out of over 10,000 voted for that rule? Sorry, that doesn't sound very much like a majority decision to me. I think that any object that can form itself into a spherical shape and attract and hold three moons deserves to be called a planet. That's a feat none of the rocky inner planets have managed!
Arf!

Orbits a star.
Is not, itself a star.
Has sufficient mass (gravity) to cause a spheroidal shape.
The orbital clearance provision is crap!  Nothing has cleared it's orbit in 4.5 billion years!
'Nuff said.
Celtic Curmudgeon
I live in Flagstaff, AZ and have spent many evenings at the obseratory looking at the stars, planets, etc.  The history in the building that holds the telescope can actually be felt.  Great things happened there.  Now, to take that away from us is wrong.  So what, Pluto is not what SOME consider a "true" planet.  As we continue to explore the universe, I'm sure our definations of alot of things will change.  But for millions of people all over the world, Pluto will remain a planet.  Who cares what the IAU thinks.
Does it really matter what the classification is? It is there, it is what it is, and it has a name. Accept it!!! It's a body in space that the majority of us will never get to see or have seen anyway; except in pictures. So what's the fuss? 76 years from now alot of things will change, this probably one of them.
This is comparable to arguing whether a tomato is a fruit or a vegetable.....
You say tomato, I say tomahto....
With New Horizons on its way to Pluto, isn't this rather ill-timed? Pluto is still relatively unknown, so taking this issue up when the first up close observer is on its way seems hasty. Also, what about the net mass of the Pluto system? Pluto apparently has enough mass to capture three satellites, so I think its "clearing its orbit". If this is a good example of science at work, then I'm even more happy with my decision to not go into "pure science" after completing my BS. Sounds more like the IAU is trying to draw attention to itself rather than any science going on.
In fact, if you look at the orbits in 3D, Neptune probably *has* cleared its orbit - although Pluto is often closer to the sun, its orbit is also highly inclined - so when it's "inside" Neptune's orbit, it's also several million miles below the plane of the ecliptic.  They never get very close to each other in 3D space at all.

Also, the "802 near earth bodies" *does* count as "having cleared the orbit".  Take a look at the moon through a good pair of binoculars and see how many it's cleared out all by it's little lonesome.  Lot more than 802 crater up there.  And remember - most of those 802 were spotted because they were nearby us ("Duh!", as my kids would say).  I'm positive if you set up a good telescope out in the middle of the asteroid belt, you'd find considerably more debris.

Also, things like Trojan asteroids trapped at Lagrangian points in the orbit certainly count as "cleared", even if they're still in orbit around the sun.  They're not free to wander all over the planet's orbit.
The new IAU definition (mass to have enough gravity to be spherical, in orbit around a star, cleared out it's neighborhood of debris) is a pretty good one (better than many of the others I've seen proposed) -- and it does leave room for Pluto and Ceres to be promoted in the distant future!  It does leave the problem on Neptune not clearing Pluto, though, so a slight modification might be needed regarding sperical bodies with moons.

How about we just asterisk (*) Pluto, like we eventually will with Barry Bonds?
Aside from the Pluto issue, the IAU action was disappointing in another way: They ignored an opportunity to set up a broader classification system into which extrasolar planets could also eventually be included. If they would have at least established the framework for such a system the Pluto controversy could have been avoided. After all, it is the rather unscientific "dwarf" designation that rubs people the wrong way. Something like "Planet - Type 1b Class K" would not seem so demeaning.
NASA today announced that grief counselors will be temporarily stationed on Neptune to help people cope  with the IAU's recent decision regarding Pluto.
I respect the IAU's decision and for those who feel we should "put it up for a world vote", get real. Some people in this world can't even read much less understand science or astronomy; and you want a world vote? Science is not about democracy you twits. It's not a popularity contest. Science is about facts, observations, discoveries, blah,blah(you know the drill). I feel safe in saying the scientist who voted Pluto out of the planet ranking know a hell of a lot more than me about the subject. But this by no means takes away from the awesome feats that the discoverer of Pluto accomplished. Take it in stride. Don't hate IAU or the scientist who voted to change Pluto's status. And don't have the mentality that science should leave things as status quo because it makes you all warm and fuzzy inside. If you think that way, you should be in some religious discipline not science.
These scientists are idiots. PLUTO RULES!!!!
Professional Astrologers will continue to designate Pluto as a planet and recognize the influence it has on a personal chart. It's effect is undeniable. But then Astrologers have always had better sense and a broader outlook than Astronomers.
Should Pluto be a planet? (from an office at Bigelow Aerospace)
"Yes because it's been a planet my whole life" -Matt
"Given the choices, I say no" -Julie
"Grandfather Pluto in, but have the rule apply to everything else." -Alli & Todd
The only reason I think Pluto can be granfathered in is because it is sometimes closer than Neptune.  
Oh and I think the terms "cleared it's neighborhood" are a little ridiculous.  -Alli
"No, it's orbit's shape is different" -Roger
"No, because it's too small because of it's orbital track around the sun"- Spencer
I guess that time does goes on and science changes...But they could have worked something out. And when less than 500 people vote on something that will affect so many it makes me leery. And I know that they are experts. I wonder if this will be like the metric system in America. My mom said that in the 70's the powers that be decided to switch to the metric systems. Thing was, Americans weren't having none of it. I think this may be part two of that. Plus from what I have read..it may a worldwide thing!
What is this? Im 11 years old and I named my turtle pluto, this is wrong, very very wrong, I hate the IAU!
– In an unprecedented move, the team of astronomers that recently declared that Pluto is no longer a planet have made an announcement that as of today our sun is no longer a star.  This declaration was made public this morning even amidst the controversy around deeming Pluto unplanetory.  Dr. Z. said in a news conference a few hours ago “we need to have some discipline in our field and are now making great strides towards uniformity in astronomy.  Something that has been absent until now.”   In declaring our sun, no longer a star, the delegation cited several basic qualities a celestial body must possess in order to fit the star definition.  It must be viewable in the night sky.  Dr. Z was quick to point our sun immediately fails on this point.  A star must be able to be gazed upon.  Again our sun fails, as several in a test group can attest to, gazing at our sun will cause retinal damage. And it hurts.   A star be seen as smaller than the planets in our solar system so as to not be confused with the planets.  Our sun fails.  Once a star falls it may not reappear.  Falling stars must remain fallen.  Our sun keeps reappearing , definitely a disqualifier. And finally stars must produce a light that is bluish in color.  Duh , sun is not blue.  Dr. Z said the team is not sure what designation will be assigned to our sun, but a grant is in the works to study the possibilities.


Someone wrote the mailing address of IAU, What about the US contribuator, Neil De Grasse Tyson's address. I suspect he is a kid hater as well as a Pluto hater.
Since Neptune is the smallest of the Gas Giants but has Pluto crossing its orbit and doesn't qualify as a planet, maybe we should refer to it as a “Dwarf Gas Giant Planet!” It’s so oxymoronic.

The first definition of a planet made much more sense: A celestial body massive enough to form a near-sphere under its own gravitational force and does not orbit another planet. Instead these people had to uphold the status-quo against bodies like Ceres and impose an arbitrary circumference minimum to what constitutes a planet. They did this without exactly defining what that circumference minimum is by adding nonsensical stipulations to the planet definition. It’s simply a lie.

These astronomical scientists, if we can call them that, had the greatest opportunity in a lifetime to expand their conscience but instead they bickered and argued and collapsed on themselves. This small group of 300 people who voted has set astronomical science back 100 years if we bother to listen to them.

If your kid receives a revised science textbook with Pluto removed, throw it out…


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=2410

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google