The lighter side of Pluto

DB, San Diego, C.A. — Thu, 24 Aug 2006 23:45:21 GMT

Long live Pluto!!

The lighter side of Pluto

Chris Eldridge, Harrisburg PA — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 00:00:42 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Raymond, Quezon City, Philippines — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 00:15:17 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Bill Wright, Brookfield, WI — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 00:52:57 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Thom — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 01:01:51 GMT

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!

The lighter side of Pluto

Jane, Southern Mississippi — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 01:05:09 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Heath Elliott, Texarkana, Texas — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 01:10:32 GMT

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

The lighter side of Pluto

Thom — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 01:58:30 GMT

How about...

My very energetic mother just served us nothing!

The lighter side of Pluto

Cappuccina Dell'Arte — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 02:55:52 GMT

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...

The lighter side of Pluto

Whizadree — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 03:06:50 GMT

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"

The lighter side of Pluto

Nesaukee — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 03:15:37 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Frank — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 03:27:04 GMT

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."

The lighter side of Pluto

Bianca, Milwaukee, WI — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 04:19:33 GMT

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!

The lighter side of Pluto

Dorothy Timmerman, San Antonio, Texas — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 04:31:59 GMT

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!!!

The lighter side of Pluto

Michael S. — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 05:17:30 GMT

Ahem....has anyone asked Pluto what it wants to be?

The lighter side of Pluto

AGP, Fontana, California — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 05:23:47 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Jerry, Gold Bar, WA — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 05:56:32 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Aaron Oesterle,Mason Mi — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 06:45:49 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Arun Dube, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 06:45:56 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

John, Dolylestown PA — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 07:50:00 GMT

I completley Support the IAU's verdict.

The lighter side of Pluto

Jason Isaacs — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 09:21:21 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

George Frazier , Licking MO — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 10:32:50 GMT

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".

The lighter side of Pluto

hanxnoe, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 12:01:47 GMT

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!

The lighter side of Pluto

Dennis Albertson — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 12:41:04 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Steve, Kokomo Indiana — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 13:04:59 GMT

"Pluto, which people question whether it is a planet, was discovered by a Unitarian, which people question whether it is a religion" -Chris J

The lighter side of Pluto

Dennis, Richmond Virginia — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 13:07:39 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Bob — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 13:30:10 GMT

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 lighter side of Pluto

Bev, Arlington, VA — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 13:31:02 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Bill D., Wisconsin — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 13:54:04 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

James, Tn — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 13:54:34 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Dancing Cats, Syracuse, NY — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 14:04:58 GMT

Will the IAU rename Uranus to Ouranos?

The lighter side of Pluto

Larry, Macon MO — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 14:06:37 GMT

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!

The lighter side of Pluto

Wade Whitlock, Aberdeen, MD — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 14:27:37 GMT

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

The lighter side of Pluto

Kim Floyd, Flagstaff, AZ — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 15:15:40 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

John Mahalko, Waterport, NY — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 15:42:12 GMT

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.....

The lighter side of Pluto

Glo, Phoenix, AZ — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 15:53:40 GMT

You say tomato, I say tomahto....

The lighter side of Pluto

Jim L, Tampa FL — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 15:59:20 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Valdis Kletnieks, Blacksburg, VA — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 16:26:56 GMT

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 lighter side of Pluto

Alan Sheets, Loveland, CO — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 16:32:35 GMT

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?

The lighter side of Pluto

J. Johnson, Chapel Hill, NC — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 16:39:56 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Hank Y. Alwet — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 17:49:30 GMT

NASA today announced that grief counselors will be temporarily stationed on Neptune to help people cope with the IAU's recent decision regarding Pluto.

The lighter side of Pluto

Tim Texas — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 17:56:52 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Brandon, City of Industry, CA — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 18:13:09 GMT

These scientists are idiots. PLUTO RULES!!!!

The lighter side of Pluto

Billie Ballard Dallas, Texas — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 18:56:35 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Alli, Mission Control, BA — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 18:57:54 GMT

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

The lighter side of Pluto

shayla, Bakersfield CA — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 21:08:09 GMT

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!

The lighter side of Pluto

Julian, Stockton, California — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 22:10:24 GMT

What is this? Im 11 years old and I named my turtle pluto, this is wrong, very very wrong, I hate the IAU!

The lighter side of Pluto

withheld, Omaha — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 22:15:38 GMT

– 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.

The lighter side of Pluto

a p garcia — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 22:16:17 GMT

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.

The lighter side of Pluto

Nesaukee — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 22:25:09 GMT

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…

The lighter side of Pluto

Andrew Purcell, Houston, Texas. — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 22:59:54 GMT

Folks, calm down a bit. We have survived the ideas of Copernicus that evicted us from the center of the universe; we can certainly survive a debate over what to call one of the larger objects on the fringe of the solar system.

The lighter side of Pluto

Harvey van vleet Battle Creek Michigan — Sat, 26 Aug 2006 15:29:58 GMT

all I have to say is GOD put pluto in line with the other planets so why not leave it there.
p.s. it's been a planet all my 76 years so why change it now.

thank you. harvey van vleet

The lighter side of Pluto

Les L Baisi — Sat, 26 Aug 2006 15:31:12 GMT

Pluto

What kind of a nefarious plot is this?-poor Pluto-after trying so hard to be accepted by this cold and heartless solar system!-All Pluto wanted was to be treated just like every other planet; he tried to make friends-he would even get real close to Neptune every now and them in an effort to be noticed and accepted-but no-that wasn’t good enough; Venus-who’s always full of hot air-started all this by referring to Pluto in insulting terms such as "planetoid" or even "asteroid". Jupiter and Saturn didn’t help either with their constant bragging about how big they are, and how some of their moons are bigger than poor old Pluto. Pluto even tried to get mercury on side because its size made Pluto feel almost normal. But no way- mercury is always so busy sucking up to Mr. Big (the sun) that it didn’t even notice what was going on. Well, it was inevitable that snobby earth and its egg head astronomers who seem to be in control of all vital statistics around here would eventually be influenced by all the talk; and sure enough the egg heads got together yesterday, punted my little buddy out of the planetary club, and officially re designated poor Pluto as a Dwarf planet-how insulting! How disgusting! It’s enough to make a normal planet or even a normal moon go back to the Oort cloud.

My question is; is there any justice in this solar system?

Les L Baisi

The lighter side of Pluto

Mark Rhoads — Sat, 26 Aug 2006 17:21:10 GMT

News Flash:
Due to enormous emotional duress resulting from crayon-inscribed hate mail, the scientific community has decided to reinstate tradition as a substitute for science. Effective immediately, there are only 4 elements - eart, air, water and fire. The Earth is the center of the universe. In keeping with ancient astrological wisdom, there are only 5 planets - Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn - which orbit the Earth. All others claiming to be planets are new-age imposters. The Earth is stable, immutable, and stationary, and the Sun rotates around it every day. Submerging yourself in water will cause "airs" and possible demonic possession, so stock up on Myrrh and other potent fragrances, and be prepared for pustules. (Sorry.) All animals were created the day after Adam and Eve, and any reference to Cain taking a wife in the Land of Nod are due to a mis-translation of Holy Writ. Political rulers are instilled by God with the Power to Lead, and should not be questioned, and electrons are a fabricarion of Satan-Worsippers. You are NOT reading this on the Web, which does not exist.

The lighter side of Pluto

Roger Lizut, Port Townsend WA — Sat, 26 Aug 2006 22:39:02 GMT

I took Astronomy 210 & 211 in 1965 at NMSU from Clyde Tombaugh. Through my 20 year old eyes he looked 100, although he was then 1 year younger than I am now.
I believe that if he were alive and still working now, he would take the decision very philosophically and continue his work unaffected.
Here are a couple vignettes about him not in the news. I firmly believe he had a universal joint in his elbow. He'd go to the blackboard and draw a perfect circle in one sweeping motion. He told us he'd go a full week without reading a newspaper and then work through them. He said his wife would ask why he bothered to read a week old paper, to which he would reply "I look at light every night that is millions of years old".

The lighter side of Pluto

Chris Eldridge, Harrisburg PA — Sun, 27 Aug 2006 00:03:34 GMT

So what exactly constitutes an “orbital neighborhood” in need of clearing? Is it proportional to the size of the planet and its distance from the sun, for example? One can also ask why call it a dwarf planet and not a proto planet if this is really what they are trying to imply?

With an estimated trillion bodies (1 meter +) in the solar system, I don't see how ultimately labeling 500~ of them as planets will blur our understanding between what is merely debris and what are worlds and cause so much confusion. Thus, why put forth such a deliberate, obvious, and even ambiguous attempt to keep this exclusive club free of newcomers? It is as if they wish to explain away these objects as "too numerous to understand." Rather than see the grandness of our solar system, these bodies will be lumped in with other 1m-wide ice balls and promptly forgotten like Ceres was.

To me, too many ambiguities remain to accept this face value. They’ve dropped the ball!

The lighter side of Pluto

Tim, Detroit — Sun, 27 Aug 2006 03:44:46 GMT

Jupiter should be classified as a brown dwarf not a planet...total is now 7.

The lighter side of Pluto

Jason Stevens Dallas Texas — Sun, 27 Aug 2006 18:10:40 GMT

God? Astrology? I thought we were talking about science here... "Setting science back 100 yrs." ?? Really? We are set back 100 yrs because Pluto has been demoted from a planet status. That would mean then, that we don't even know about Pluto, right? After all it was discovered within this "100 year" setback. I bet alot of you IAU haters and oppenents if the IAU decision would have made a comparable argument during the times of Pythagoras and Copernicus. You would have been the ones arguing, "No, we ARE the center of the universe!"; And "No, the world IS flat!" ; And "God, put us at the center we should stay there" ; And "Earth has been at the center of the universe my whole life."

Now that's what I call going backwards!

The lighter side of Pluto

Marc Allen, Utah — Sun, 27 Aug 2006 19:33:32 GMT

Bottom line, science changes--therefore get used to it. My question, is why they didn't add a provision about the ecliptic? That would leave Pluto out, but, correct me if I'm wrong, keep the other 8? And, I'm sorry, but a worldwide vote is just stupid. Just like most of the world! *rimshot* Why should someone who has spent their whole life learning how to shoot things, drink beer and expectorate masterfully have the same power of vote on this as someone who has spent more years in college than they ever could dream of LEARNING these things is rediculous.

And, finally, after that huge run-on sentence, I'm done. Bye!

The lighter side of Pluto

R. Owen, Houston, Texas — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 01:00:44 GMT

Heath Elliott: Pluto has an atmosphere, it's just not in a gaseous state all the time.

Bianca: Change is NOT always good. Change can be good, change can be bad or change can be good for some people, but not for others. Remember new Coke? Not exactly a good change.

Bill D.: If Neptune's orbit has been cleared, then so has Pluto's.

Valdis Kletnieks: The definition as adopted states that the object has to clear its orbit (or the equivalent words) but does not say by how much. This is one of many reasons why the definition is essentially no good--too vague. I'd be willing to bet that Pluto has just as clear a path around the sun as any of the other eight planets.

Chris Eldridge: Good point about the size of the neighborhood. That is not specified in the definition, either. So just how big is it? Apparently the IAU thinks it is at least 17 A.U. big because that's as close as Pluto gets to Neptune (Pluto actually comes closer to Uranus--11 A.U.). Remember, they are using Pluto's "crossing" Neptune's orbit as the reason it should be demoted. That's 93 million miles times 17. If the neighborhood is at least 17 A.U., then every planet is disqualified. Look at how close Mars and Venus get to the Earth. Also remember, the definition does NOT say that an object cannot "cross" the path of a planet.

I do not object to Pluto being reclassified. I don't like the proposal adopted by the IAU because it is flawed and too vague.

This proposed solution is (while not perfect) simpler and much less vague and more definitive than the one the IAU adopted.

Two separate categories of planets: major planets and minor planets. Asteroids will no longer be called minor planets, just asteroids. Major planets: orbit the sun, are round and are above an established size limit. Minor planets: orbit the sun, are round and are below an established size limit. No doubt there would be months of arguing and debate on what the size limit would be, but this proposal would be much more clear cut and much less vague. It may not be perfect, but it's at least as good as the one the IAU has adopted.

The lighter side of Pluto

Chris Eldridge — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 05:07:32 GMT

On another blog someone suggested a planet is a roundish body that does not orbit another planet. This would allow free-floating planets (and Charon) to become, well... planets, too!

R.Owen, I wouldn't mind a classification of minor and major (or gas, terrestrial, and icy) if indeed all roundish bodies made the grade as "planets," not just Plutons or dwarfs.

When I think of proto-planets (which is sort of what the IAU is trying to suggest here by saying in-mature planet unable to clear its orbit), I think of bodies that are hit so often that their surface still has not solidified. Not sure what a Jovian proto planet would be, but I guess that once you reach the gas giant stage you become a planet even if you were still getting hit a lot.

I’m personally surprised at the number of people sticking up for the new definition. Tell me, if this new def. is so intuitive and so irreproachable, why wasn’t this very same criterion about “clearing an orbit” raised much more vocally a week earlier when the first definition came out? I heard every imaginable argument as to what a planet should be the week prior and yet only one person mentioned the need to clear an orbit as a possible criterion.

The lighter side of Pluto

Charley Gibbs, Phoenix, Arizona — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 12:33:43 GMT

Where is it said that Pluto has not cleared it's orbit. We can hardly see the planet and it's moons let alone anything else that may or may not be in or crossing its orbit. Same goes for objects in Neptune's orbit. Others have reaidly shown that Pluto and Neptune do not get in eachother's way.

The lighter side of Pluto

Rick Mitchell Cary NC — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 13:05:14 GMT

does anyone of importance really care what the inconsquential inhabitants of the third rock orbiting an obscure star think about anything?

The lighter side of Pluto

P. Sinv — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 15:06:48 GMT

With this planetary debacle in place, IAU needs to clearly define not only the terminology of a planet but also comet, asteroid, satellite (moon), cosmic debris, and stars a little more clearly so there is a clear boundary of how these univeral objects fit in our realm of space and time.

The lighter side of Pluto

Mike — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 18:30:04 GMT

I can understand downgrading Pluto from Planet status, but could someone please explain to me why Paris Hilton is a Star ????

The lighter side of Pluto

Fred, Makati, Philippines — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:35:35 GMT

It's better to add than to subtract. So what if there are hundreds of dwarf planets hanging around in our solar system. The more the merrier! Pluto stays and if they discover more like it then feel free to add some more to the list. Big Deal.

The lighter side of Pluto

Frank, East Northport, New York — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 23:41:13 GMT

Will Disney declare Pluto not a real cartoon character?

The lighter side of Pluto

Jasmine — Fri, 08 Sep 2006 21:43:55 GMT

Pluto is a Planet! I have learned that Pluto is a planet all my life, I wont let this fact change! Pluto IS a planet!

I think these people really need to study Pluto more before they say such things.

Kids would be furious about this, it's just not right to change a fact so quickly. I would know, being a child myself, I understand.

The lighter side of Pluto

Dale Patterson, Rockford, MI. — Sat, 09 Sep 2006 20:44:13 GMT

O.K. folks, fairs fair. Since Plutos no longer a planet, neither is Neptune (it has two dwarf planets obstructing its orbit). So when will this oversight be corrected? When enough members of the IAU with a vendeta againts Neptune get together to vote it out of the planetary line-up, like when they did it to Pluto.

The lighter side of Pluto

Trey Taylor age 10 Denver, CO — Thu, 28 Sep 2006 22:37:43 GMT

I love pluto! it is my life!!!

The lighter side of Pluto

Renee, York, NE — Sun, 28 Jan 2007 21:48:42 GMT

It is going to make me feel extremely old when I have to tell my kids, "When I was your age, there were NINE planets."

The lighter side of Pluto

K. L., Seattle, Wash. — Sun, 18 Feb 2007 14:12:34 GMT

Thanks a lot IAU! The biggest reason i became interested in astronomy so many years ago was because of mysterious, little, odd-ball Pluto (and i'm probably not the only one)! Now they took my favorite planet away from me! And to add insult to injury, they made the planet criteria even more confusing! These egghead scientists...why is Pluto not a planet(when it meets the most important planet criterias) while Europe and Asia are considered seperate continents (Is it because of history, culture and tradition that those 2 landmasses are considered seperate continents? Because if that's the case than Pluto should be still be considered a planet as well)!?...next thing you know those 424 IAU members who voted Pluto out will decide on renaming Uranus to something more suitable to them, like..."Theiranuses" thus reducing the planet count to 7!

I say let's send them all on a one way trip to still-relatively-unknown Pluto so they can get a closer look and really decide whether this distant snowball, some 1,430 miles in diameter LARGE (and with THREE moons, an atmosphere -albeit a tenuous one -as far as we know) should retain its lost planet status!

The lighter side of Pluto

P. Kennard, Snohomish, Wash. — Tue, 20 Feb 2007 09:02:43 GMT

Why is Pluto not a Planet? Why does the term planet have to be so technical? Why are those IAU members so cold hearted? Why does this issue have to be based solely on science? Why are gas prices so high? Why did the chicken cross the road?...and lastly, why does everything have to be so confusing????...as in everything else these days, let's blame all this on Bush!

The lighter side of Pluto

lucie plymouth england — Thu, 22 Feb 2007 14:27:15 GMT

Who said that it is not a planet anymore???

The lighter side of Pluto

Samantha, California — Sun, 25 Feb 2007 23:09:48 GMT

I think that Pluto has the right to be a planet. I mean, before the AIU thing said that its not, everyone knew that it was and was never going against it. Now just because a couple people decided that it isn't a planet because its small, doesnt mean anything!

The lighter side of Pluto

Laurel Kornfeld, Highland Park, NJ — Sun, 29 Apr 2007 05:46:20 GMT

"The IAU is a governing body of experts. They are highly educated and they make decisions based on sound and logical reasoning... 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."

In the case of the Pluto vote, this statement is simply incorrect. 424 out of 10,000 IAU members voted on the last day of a 10-day conference in a move that was far more political than scientific. Most of those who voted are not planetary scientists and therefore, not experts in this area but in other fields of astronomy. They deliberately held the vote once most of the attendees had gone home in such a surreptitious process that Pluto expert Dr. Alan Stern describes that vote as having been "hijacked" by a small minority of IAU members with their own agenda. No email voting was allowed; the only astronomers who had a say were those in the room. Almost immediately, 300+ planetary scientists signed a petition saying they will not use the new planet definition. What about these experts? The reality is that the decision was not made for sound reasons; the new planet definition is sloppy and was created solely to exclude Pluto. I do not believe the decision will stand, and I applaud those who don't blindly follow it just because a group of so-called experts made a ruling. And I am proudly teaching my nephews that Pluto is a planet, as is Eris, and will refute anything they are taught in school saying otherwise.

The lighter side of Pluto

athira — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:10:24 GMT

in my opinion we cannot deny the sayings of our grand fathers.Infact they calculated the nine planets with heir naked eyes itself.why pluto also came in their mind.their are many stories and poems also. we should have to think a lot.