Will Pluto prevail?

Thom, Grandville, MI — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 01:06:11 GMT

Clyde Tombaugh has probably completed a lot of turning over in his grave by now.

Will Pluto prevail?

The Quietman — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 03:48:04 GMT

Since the ancient Greeks coined the term we should still be using their definition: Traveler, ie. a light that travels through the sky rather than being fixed.

Will Pluto prevail?

friend-of-pluto, asheville, nc — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 13:53:55 GMT

under their logic, we'd go back to 49 states, since hawaii is "just" an "island" state...

Will Pluto prevail?

Tom Lazarus, Rochester, NY — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 13:54:30 GMT

what's wrong with the term 'planetoid'? sci-fi writers have been using it for decades. it's certainly shorter and more elegant than 'dwarf planet' and it splits the verbal and physical difference between asteroid and planet perfectly.

Will Pluto prevail?

Bob Queen — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 14:11:38 GMT

It's really simple. Pluto is big enough to be round. It has moons. So it's a planet, dummy. Let's not do something stupid as to compare Pluto with asteroids that are potato shaped and try to say they're the same thing. Pluto has always been a planet and always will be. And they're probably at least one or more planets out there, too. The IAU should show some guts (and brains) and declare them to be planets, too.

Will Pluto prevail?

Fred Smith, Smithville, NJ — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 14:37:56 GMT

I think it's a silly argument--Pluto's a planet, leave it alone.

Will Pluto prevail?

R. Cavaretti — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 14:58:11 GMT

The styrofoam kit I bought my kids has nine balls in it. I wish it had twelve. Painting that many balls would keep them busy longer. Perhaps we should increase the complexity of our solar system.

Will Pluto prevail?

Joseph Basile, Worcester MA — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 15:06:03 GMT

I also consider the demotion of Pluto to be a double edged sword. One the one hand, it is unfortunate the we only consider our system to include eight planets, but at the same time, it's likely the children will become farmiliar with Pluto, Ceres, and Eris in gradeschool, whereas previously Ceres was as obscure as any of the other major objects in the asteroid belt.

Will Pluto prevail?

Scott Portland Maine — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 15:41:40 GMT

"If you have only so much space in the pigeonhole, and only so much time to devote to the solar system in the classroom, where do you draw the line?"

This is outrageous thinking. this ammounts to dumbing down.
LIMIT the ammount of real information? who decides what there is "time for in the class room?"
I cant believe that the scientific community would take this approach, leaving out information just because it doesnt fit in a certain mold?
How about we leave the IAU out of the pigeon hole and out of the classroom, that would end the discussion.

Will Pluto prevail?

Don Boyer — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 16:37:47 GMT

I find the whole debate over planetary status to be somewhat like little boys hiding behind the barn, seeing who can "mark" the barn wall from farthest away. You see a lot of the same in paleontology where scientific reputations are at stake over the latest interpretation of small collections of bones and skulls. There's so much ego rubbing going on, the science takes a back seat to publicizing a point of view. I would think that mostly round balls orbiting the sun directly (not following a bigger round ball around) are most likely closest to the definition of a planet. Small, irregular lumps are not. Finer definitions seem to be straining at gnats.

Will Pluto prevail?

Erin M, Ft. Lee, NJ — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 17:01:37 GMT

If Pluto has three moons orbiting it, that makes it a planet, no? It may be a "dwarf" planet, but it's still a planet.

Will Pluto prevail?

Peter, Seattle, Wash — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 17:24:09 GMT

I say it's a planet. It was discovered, it was named after a God, it's a planet. Can't demote that. It will rise again!

Will Pluto prevail?

a p garcia — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 19:06:43 GMT

Pluto is more of a planet than some planets since it has 2 and not one moon. I have no idea how many times Clyde Tombaugh and Walt Disney have turned over in their graves.

Will Pluto prevail?

Antonio garcia, Madison, WI. — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 19:35:59 GMT

Pluto will always be a planet regardles of the "new" rules.period.

Will Pluto prevail?

skywatcher — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 19:38:52 GMT

Believe it or not. Pluto still holds real power in the science of astrology...the harbinger of death and transformation. Where's your Pluto?

Will Pluto prevail?

Garrett Wyoming, MI — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 20:00:21 GMT

For some reason, while growing up, Pluto was always my favorite planet. Its out there where its cold and harsh and dark, but it IS there. It may travel an irregular path to the other planets, but it IS still there. Also, it has been perceived as a planet for so long it should remain that way.

Will Pluto prevail?

Quietman — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 23:12:36 GMT

Alf said that there were 2 more beyond Pluto, my guess is that he was right.

Will Pluto prevail?

Scott — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 00:20:58 GMT

If something is round, orbits a star (whether eliptical orbit or not), is not a moon, an asteroid, a comet, a meteor, or any type of star it should be a planet! dwarf this, giant this.....blah blah blah. Actually I do like categorizing stars as giants and dwarfs but with planets it just seems much simpler and it should be. Pluto in my opinion is a planet. In 2014 when New Horizons gets there my opinion will change once I see some images.

Will Pluto prevail?

Jon, San Diego, CA — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 00:29:10 GMT

The problem with defining a planet as something that's become round under its own gravity and isn't following something around is that Pluto's moon Charon meets this definition, too. Pluto and Charon orbit a point in space between the two bodies, and both are round. Also, some non-round asteroids have moons as well.

Will Pluto prevail?

Paul, Gig Harbor, WA — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 00:41:39 GMT

This is how they are spending time and the money??? How absolutely moronic...

Will Pluto prevail?

Jason, Stanford, CA — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 03:53:13 GMT

Puerto Rico has its own branches of government, levies taxes, and its own constitution, yet it is not a state and is still part of the United States and most people are fine with that. Pluto may be round and have moons (albeit the center of mass of the pluto system does not lie in any single body) and it still is part of the solar system, just under a different classification. Leave your nostalgia behind and welcome to more concrete descriptions of a planet, dwarf planet, et cetera

Will Pluto prevail?

Constance, Florida — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 08:23:49 GMT

Ok first off Pluto has been called a planet for thousands of years, why change it now? Second off, do you people -seriously- have nothing better to do than debate on weather or not a planet is a planet? I mean seriously people, what are you being paid for?

Will Pluto prevail?

john,ottawa Canada — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 13:44:46 GMT

it should be classified as a planetary system, or a planet, in my opinion, because it contains itself to a spherical shape through its own gravity , and because it orbits a star, even though it also orbits around a common point in space with one of its moons, it does have a second moon which orbits it.

therefore i feel it should be classified as both a planet and a planetary system, depending on how you are describing it.

Will Pluto prevail?

Wyatt, Houston, Tx — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 14:25:35 GMT

I personally think the definition should be broken down on two axis -- Gravity and Core Mass.

IE:
All planets are spheroid incapable of self-sustaining fusion that does not consume or involve enough mass to maintain a specific absolute brightness or magnitude.

size (minor < .5g, normal, major > 2g, giant > 8g)
core (rocky, liquid, ice, gas)

So we could say that Pluto was a minor rocky planet and Jupitor is a major gas planet....

Will Pluto prevail?

Ed Jarrett, Warsaw, Indiana — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 14:50:33 GMT

Planet or not, consider the discussion this has raised. Before this debate I had never considered the concept of drawing a line between planet and non-planet. As a result of this conflict, many less-informed people such as myself have been educated. I don't care what you call Pluto (I doubt Pluto cares either), I think it's fantastic that the attention raised has educated so many.

Will Pluto prevail?

Mike in ark. — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 15:29:05 GMT

Hmm, I thought the United Federation of planet decided
that the Sol-Terran system had 10 planets. starting with Appolo and ending with Pulto. Oh well animals aren't very smart anyway.

Will Pluto prevail?

David Anderson - Ontario, OR — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:09:32 GMT

I think that many of the "definitions" created to describe what is and isn't a planet were so arbitrary and unscientific in their creation that they negate any validity. Get the egos and politics out of science or you all fall in danger of becoming nothing more than another set of politicians. We already have enough of those gumming up the works!

Will Pluto prevail?

Klif Hoover , Kingman Az. — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:17:18 GMT

Whose idea was it to bring this planatary demotion up anyway? Don't they have more important things to do?

Will Pluto prevail?

Robert, Austin, TX — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 17:14:14 GMT

What happened to the scientific method? Present a theory, debate it, knock it down, revise it, present the new theory, rinse and repeat?

Changing Pluto's classification as we learn more and revise our theories about the type and quantitative distribution of the objects within our solar system should be expected and respected. Is this new classification the end of the debate? Unlikely. But the arguements for keeping the old system based on emotional attachment or familiarity, rather than on scientific merit, are missing the point.

So keep beating on the current theory, not because we don't like change, but with an eye towards making the next theory better than the previous two.

Will Pluto prevail?

Josh Levin — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 18:00:52 GMT

The center of gravity of the earth-moon system is about a thousand miles below the earth's surface. The center of gravity of the Sun-Jupiter system is a point outside of the Sun (above the visible surface of the Sun), but a lot closer to the Sun than to Jupiter. So -- is the Sun part of double-star system with Jupiter. No, because Jupiter is not a star.

Will Pluto prevail?

Jake, Foxhome, MN — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 18:18:04 GMT

Luckily there was a new discovery to go along with the Pluto demotion: people discovered there's something called the IAU, which is probably what they were going for in the first place with this.

Will Pluto prevail?

Mike, Gastonia, NC — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 18:19:40 GMT

Given the rush of new planets we are discovering outside our solar system, it makes sense to have a newer classification system to cataloging these things. That being said, pluto is still out there, where it has beeen since mankind walked this planet. Why does it's classification (Which is really all we are talking about here) make a difference to why it is taught in classroms or why it should be part of planetary models? It is STILL there. there is still a lot of history around it, when you do into who discovered it and how.
If anything we should add these new bodies to the model and start teaching about some of these new planetary systems we are seeing. Pigeonhole? What a pile of garbage is that!? Well. I need more class time so we are going to need to get rid of "Z", "Q", and "V". Since not many people use them anyway and we just don't have the time in the classroom. LOL.

Will Pluto prevail?

Gayle — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 18:34:05 GMT

We all have to categorize things. As scientists, when new information comes available, we have to incorporate it into our existing picture. Sometimes it means changing something not everyone wants to change. Why not do as we educators have to do everytime a new change comes along - accept it and teach the reasoning behind it. It isn't like it was just U.S. scientists who came up with this new definition. It was a worldwide committee.

Will Pluto prevail?

Josh Levin — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 18:38:24 GMT

Note to Quietman -- Mork from Ork described Pluto as being a "Mickey Mouse" planet.

Note that Pluto was the only "major" planet discovered and named by an American, after its existence was postulated by another American. It seems to me that Pluto's "demotion" was a result of the loss of international prestige by the United States. I blame this on the policies of George W. Bush. I think that Bush should immediately travel to Pluto (the planet, not the Disney character), in person, to apologize.

Will Pluto prevail?

BIGDADDYMO, Somewhere in Iowa — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 18:41:27 GMT

Is there somewhere that an "average joe" star gazer can see what the so called geniuses qualify a planet as? Like the body must be round, in orbit around a star and be with in that star's oort cloud. If we ever see a complex and complete solar system outside of our own, only then will we be able to start to qualify what is a planet and what is not a planet.

Will Pluto prevail?

James Ryan — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 19:27:19 GMT

There is a funny article involving the demotion of Pluto, check it out:
http://www.daveobrien.com/popups/pluto.htm

Will Pluto prevail?

K. Hunter — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 23:01:15 GMT

Concerning the marketing aspect of solar system models... my bet is that this ordeal will last as long as "New Coke" did.... then we'll have to come up with a new name for the restored 9 planet system like... "Classic Solar System" with the old formula. ha!

Will Pluto prevail?

skywatcher — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 23:32:43 GMT

For CONSTANCE in Florida: The planet Pluto was NOT discovered until ****1930****!! "...the most distant planet in the solar system, inches across the sky so slowly that in the years since it was discovered in 1930,it hasn't even made it half way around the zodiac. It won't complete a circuit until 2176 !

Will Pluto prevail?

Andy, DeKalb, Il — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 23:49:46 GMT

Who cares? Is there a more mundane or pointless debate in science right now? I doubt it.

Will Pluto prevail?

Loren, SF Bay Area, CA — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 01:34:02 GMT

Constance: Pluto hasn't been considered a planet for "thousands of years," since it was only discovered in the 1930s.

I agree with the poster who lamented the "dumbing down" of science education, regarding the comment that "there's only so much time; what do we choose to cram into our precious children's minds?" Teach our children that there's debate over what to call Pluto and why, and let them draw their own conclusions. That's what science is about.

Will Pluto prevail?

Shane, Seattle, Wash — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 04:14:31 GMT

Lets see...

Scientists argue that since pluto is smaller than our own moon, it can't be a planet.

Hmm... since Wikipedia contains more information than the scientists do, they can't be scientists.

Lets use their own logic against them.

If a body in space has orbiting sattelites (or not) and it's not classified as a star, then it's definately a planet. I don't care if there's 9, 14, 55 of them, or whatever they finally classify it as finally being with this definition.

Look at it another way, we can limit the classification to the following definition:

If it has significant enough mass to form into a spheroid shape, meaning it is round, and in the case of multiple sized objects, is the largest object that orbits with another, then it's classified as a planet, provided it doesn't have enough mass to start nuclear processes within the core.

Brown Dwarfs do have some nuclear processes, just not significant quantity, so they are classified as stars, not planets. Nutron stars also have nuclear processes even though their physical dimension may be smaller than Jupiter.

If the object is or is not spheriod, but orbits a planet as a smaller mass than the planet itself, then it's classified as a moon.

If the object is a non-shperiod shape, then it's an asteroid or planetiod determined by placement of other similar objects. Meaning the belt region between Jupiter and Mars contains Asteriods. NEO's would be considered Planetiods.

I mean really... how hard can it be?

Will Pluto prevail?

Silver, Dallas, TX — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 05:22:30 GMT

"Ok first off Pluto has been called a planet for thousands of years, why change it now?" -- Constance, Florida

#1. I think it's a little closer to 77 years.
#2. That's like saying, "We've been calling the world flat for thousands of years, why change it now?" Because we know more about the earth than we did thousands of years ago. And we also know more about Pluto and other bodies in the solar system than we did in 1930. If we're going to call Pluto a major planet, then we don't have nine planets. We need to include Eris, and maybe Quaoar, Sedna and others. And what if we eventually find 500 of these bodies? Our planet list is going to get a little unwieldy.

I think that sentimentality should have no bearing on scientific classifications, and I agree with Robert's comment about the scientific method. We will probably find a better system, but I think that the decision to put Pluto in another category from the major planets was the right one. Maybe something a little more dignified than "dwarf planet" could be used. I like "plutino", myself.

Will Pluto prevail?

Wizard Of Hamilton, Hamilton, MT — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 07:51:58 GMT

Okay now, let me make this very clear...
Pluto IS a planet.
Always has been since it was first formed, and always will be, after our home star, Solaris burns, itself out, in the next few billion years.
I don't care what these conservative IAU
"fruit-cakes" think or say, or if they burn me to the stake for heresy....The truth is plain and simple:
PLUTO IS A PLANET!
And yes, I believe that there more than just the nine worlds in this star system, that are planets, waiting to be discovered and explored.

Will Pluto prevail?

Megan, Atlanta, GA — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 13:23:11 GMT

For those of you saying "Pluto has been considered a planet for too long, why change it now?" What if we had said "The world has been considered flat for too long, why think its round now?"

Science is the search for truth, not the keeping of traditions and what makes things easier. Therefore, scientific information should be allowed to change if the evidence points toward that need.

Will Pluto prevail?

Rob Williamson, Canada — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 15:38:37 GMT

I think it's funny that some join the debate by complaining that the debate is pointless. I'll bet (very hypothetically) they'd yell "Quiet!" in a library too. Oh well, I can't believe I've wasted all this time wasting time. Go Sol! And ALL your children!

Will Pluto prevail?

Andrew V. Sacramento Ca — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 16:12:46 GMT

To all those who are complaining about the demotion of Pluto to "dwarf" planetary status, consider this: How many of you knew of Eris, Ceres, Vesta, and the like before all this came up?
As has happened and will (hopefully) continue to happen, the unintended "consequence" of this debate is that now people are a bit more educated about the world (and solar system) around us.

You may now return to obsessing over Brittany, Lindsey, and Paris....

Will Pluto prevail?

Robert F. Brown, Orleans, Mass. — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 16:35:03 GMT

I'm a big fan of Pluto and a strong supporter of NASA's 'New Horizons'

I worry that 'New Horizons' will lose funding due to Pluto's demotion and this will compromise the potential success of the mission.

Anything less than a fully successful mission of the spaceprobe to Pluto will jepordize technological advancement of America's space program and make it more difficult to deal with the Asteroids that are due to smash the Earth in 2017 and 2018.

Pluto's status is a matter of not only national security but world survival.

Pluto MUST be reinstated as a planet of our solar system with full rights and benefits.

Will Pluto prevail?

Jeff, State of Confusion — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 17:30:42 GMT

Can you all please dedicate this same amount of time to helping me find my carkeys ??
Lost them in '86....behind Pizza Hut....

Will Pluto prevail?

Chris Eldridge, HBG PA — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 18:30:20 GMT

Don't even get me started on this... the I in IAU stands for incompetent not to mention a few other colorful adjectives that are not part of the full acronym. Adding planets instead of subtracting was not only a just thing to do but would have added great excitement to each new find. They are an embarrassment to their own field and ignored their own multi-year study on the subject. As the one guy admitted here last time, they were just pressed for time and made a hasty decision just to go home... yeah, kind of like Congress...

Will Pluto prevail?

Fred Kerr, Greensboro, NC — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 18:35:13 GMT

Round, has a moon, orbits sun, not a moon of another planet

Anything else is ego driven, and mental self-abuse

Will Pluto prevail?

Caroline, Arlington, VA — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 20:36:24 GMT

I would just like to commend 99% of the commenters on this site for the well-reasoned and rationale opinions offered on the subject of Pluto's planet status. I so rarely come across dignified web discussion, and it's been a real pleasure! Thank you all.

P.S.--Pluto is not visible in sky with the naked eye or most handheld telescopes, so it certainly was not known to the ancient civilizations, or any other society until the 2oth century.

Will Pluto prevail?

Dave, Adelaide, South Australia — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 23:54:30 GMT

Ambiguity abounds in lots of fields. Take simple geography. Is Australia the largest island (surrounded by water) or smallest continent (bigger than Greenland). People who say history or custom define continents would have dificulty drawing the line between Europe and Asia (let's see, follow this mountain range, maybe this river, fudge it across this desert ...) or the realists would say Eurasia and ask what is the fuss about? Geographers know they aren't going to win any of these so leave them well alone.

By the way I am sure Piazzi in 1801 didn't look up from his telescope and say "I've discovered the first asteroid". He was looking for a planet and thought he'd found one. It took a few further discoveries before the penny dropped that there could be thousands of them. Then the name changed.

And Herschel thought he'd discovered a comet when he saw Uranus, so maybe we should go back to his original definition.

I personnally like the description of the solar system by (I think) Isaac Asimov: 'Jupiter, plus debris'.

Will Pluto prevail?

Greg, Phoenix, Arizona — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 15:54:03 GMT

There are sixteen objects in the Solar system larger than Pluto.

Seven of them are moons. Our own moon being the thirteenth largest object. (only four other moons are larger than it, and two of them are larger than the planet Mercury)

Even newfound Eris is larger than Pluto.

At seventeenth largest object to orbit the sun, or object orbiting an object orbiting the sun, Pluto is a speck among mountains.

After doing my research I've come to agree that Pluto probably shouldn't have ever been labeled a planet. (Just as the asteroid Ceres had been centuries before and itself also demoted. Yes, this whole Pluto debacle has happened before.)

Pluto is a doirdis. [dwor-dis] It is fine as a doirdis. It still has it's own distinct and exciting features. With two moons, Hydra and Nix, and being a binary planetary system itself, along with co-pilot Charon, the two have potential to be kings among doirdes [dwor-deez](Ceres and Eris, and the hundreds of other neptaurines (my funny word for trans-Neptunian objects)and KBOs (Kuiper-belt objects) that by definition could soon also share in the recognition as planets of dwarf stature).

NOTE: doirdis comes from an alternate spelling of dwar (from the unofficial term "dwarf planet") added together with Dis Pater. In honor of Pluto itself. (Dis Pater being the Roman name for the Greek god Pluto/Hades . Orcas being the other Roman name and having already been taken by a KBO.)

Will Pluto prevail?

Charlie Warner, NH — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 16:46:40 GMT

The IAS has concluded Rhode Island isn't a real state. It is a dwarf state, or stateoid. It's so small that if you get up to highway speed, you'll be thrown into another state or the ocean. That goes double for Hawaii.

Given their petroleum reserves Alaska and Texas are gas giants.

Seriously, what more do we need to define planethood in a workable way than to say first that a planet must orbit the sun, and second that it must be masssive enough to be very close to spherical? I think that bending the word "planet" to a new and unintuitive shape makes scientists look silly to the layman,

And, what benefit is there to all this fiddling? So what if we end up with twelve or twenty planets. Did we ever expect to find out some planets have dozens and dozens of moons? We didn't see a need to mess with the definition of "moon".

Will Pluto prevail?

Cary,Baton Rouge, LA — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 21:34:58 GMT

Does it matter. I didn't realize a chunk of Ice being classified as a planet or not made any bit of difference to what matters most in life. Instead of arguing over whether Pluto is a planet, why not try to solve issues that are on this planet. A lot of you are smart enough to do so if you apply yourselves.

Will Pluto prevail?

Andy DeKalb Il — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 08:38:19 GMT

"I think it's funny that some join the debate by complaining that the debate is pointless."

Yes. Since I don't have an opinion I can't tell folks that I think the debate is pointless. Right.

Will Pluto prevail?

Eddie, GM, WI — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 21:20:06 GMT

The debate is silly and way past tiresome. Its something that the IAU should never have bothered to waste their time with. Now astronomers are having to deal with a preposterous public-relations problem, and for what? A lousy little DEFINITION???

Subtle Nature is often more ambiguous than our feeble attempts to stuff Her works into ridiculous pigeon-holes of mere definition. That's not what science is about.

BTW, it is startling to read so many comments that exposes a major misunderstanding - roundness and having moons are NOT good criteria for being a "planet"! Asteroids and moons can be round, and quite small irregular bodies can and do have moons.

I like Tom Lazarus' suggestion: what's wrong with using the word "planetoid" if there is any ambiguity or uncertainty in the matter? Its a perfectly sensible and consistently descriptive word to apply to "small worlds" that share a region of the Solar System.

Will Pluto prevail?

Eddie — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 21:32:49 GMT

BTW, again: If Pluto was defined as a "beachball", it would in no way "demote" it for the very real WORLD that it and potentially hundreds of other similarly-sized Kuiper Belt Objects with moons (known and probably yet to be discovered) in fact ARE.

Personally, I first think of a certain Disney cartoon character whenever I see the name in print. Last time I checked, Mickey's dog is not very spherically "round", nor does he have any moons. He would make a terrible "planet".

"Pluto" - its just a NAME. "Planet" - its just a WORD. Get over it already. Its a non-issue.

Will Pluto prevail?

Laurel Kornfeld, Highland Park, NJ — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 22:39:05 GMT

Pluto IS a planet, and it will prevail. Those who talk about the need to "accept change" should realize that nothing real has actually changed. The only thing that happened was the discovery of objects beyond Pluto that have achieved hydrostatic equilibrium, ONE of which--Eris--is slightly larger than Pluto. This object should be designated a planet. What did happen was that four percent of the IAU, or 424 out of 10,000 members took part in a vote via a flawed process and settled on what Stern rightly describes as a "sloppy" definition. Why should the whole world be mandated to adopt their definition considering the many problems with both the process of the vote and the fact that the definition makes no sense in that it states a "dwarf planet" is not a planet at all? There are also many astronomers who are not members of the IAU. The IAU should not be given this much power to the extent that their word is law on the subject.

I made sure to buy my now four-year-old nephew books about the solar system that include Pluto, and I plan on buying him a children's model of the solar system with Pluto as well (Toys R Us here in NJ still sells them). Teaching children only eight planets does them a tremendous disservice by denying them knowledge of a very intriguing world that in every way qualifies as a planet. That said, I am also teaching my nephew about Eris, adding that it's not in many books because it was just found very recently.

Using the argument that we can't teach everything and that we have to draw the line somewhere is just as "sentimental" as is argument based on the tradition of nine planets. If there are 200 planets in the solar system, then that's what we should be teaching. My prediction is that within a few years, there will be multiple versions of posters, books, models of the solar system, some with eight planets, some with nine, some with ten, some with twelve. This will likely reflect future changes to the definition of planet.

The IAU definition is a fiasco that most certainly "does not work." I look forward to seeing it "fall by the wayside" where it belongs. And next time the IAU votes on something of this magnitude, they should make an effort to include the other 96 percent of their members.

Will Pluto prevail?

Eddie, GM WI — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 08:45:35 GMT

To Laurel (and generally to the respondents to this article): yes, of course, by all means, refer to Pluto as a "planet"! There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. In the generic sense, the word is certainly applicable to any body in orbit around the Sun or a star, right down to the size of a speck of dust.

The word means "wanderer", and just because the ancients could identify only 5 of them (besides the Sun and the Moon, both of which were ALSO considered to be "wanderers" and therefore "planets") doesn't mean that the literally billions of other objects down to dust-speck size that can't be seen by the unaided human eye from Earth are disqualified as legitimate "wanderers" plying their own independent orbits around the Sun: they're ALL "planets". The scale and other circumstances have very little else to do with it. Every speck of dust is a "world". Ever single mote is significant, and they all follow the same rules that govern the motions of what we are all pleased to agree "ARE" planets, such as, say, Jupiter or Earth (NOT recognized by the ancients, who considered their own world entirely fixed in space: NOT a "wanderer" at all!).

Today, of course, we know a bit better. By all means, use the word "planet" with wild abandon, to refer to any material non-stellar bodies in orbit around a star. Or call a moon a "planet" of a planet. OR, if a poetic approach seizes you, go ahead and use the word metaphorically to refer any kind of wanderer-like objects that attend a larger object, such as birds clustering around a tree, or perhaps mosquitoes pestering a moose.

They're ALL "planets". Its just a "WORD"! The real things out there aren't be altered by what we decide to call them. They were all there LONG before we showed up to categorize them, with that peculiarly widespread notion that definition alone can assist us in our quest for "meaning".

There really ISN'T any great "magnitude" to this issue besides what people commonly misinterpret and internalize as such. Kids ought to be taught as much as they can absorb about the details and the hows behind the wonders of the universe they live in, as science has so spectacularly revealed them. Nature is a magnificent tapestry that is utterly indifferent to how little beings from a little world pigeon-hole Her in their little minds. She's much bigger than we CAN think.

Its OK to call Pluto a "planet" - no problem whatsoever - as long as you also let your nephew know (as I have my own nephews) that every mote of dust wrested from a comet or from the collision between two chunks of rock in the asteroid belt are ALSO a "wanderers": undeniably each worlds in their own right. Its just a question of scale and whether we can suspend our prejudices and accept the distinction between the words we use for designation and the objects of actuality themselves.

The IAU was wrong in tackling this definition because the issue has no "magnitude" whatsoever. It is a NON-ISSUE (scientifically) that has been suitably amplified. The perceived importance of definition on the matter was based on a rather trivial and misguided technical point among astronomers. That it had been magnified to hideous proportions by the media was every bit as wrongheaded as it was predictable.

But that doesn't mean science is wrong. It only shows that science is conducted by fallible human beings...who in this case decided that it was "important" to "define" exactly what a "planet" was.

Its entirely sensible to refer to Pluto as a "planet". Nobody from the IAU will attempt to prohibit anybody from saying so. Its NOT some kind of edict from some pulpit! They were only trying to digger something technically out between them, and the botch was in their gross inestimation of what the culture/media would make of it.

Will Pluto prevail?

MICHAEL, ST. ALBERT ALBERTA — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 22:44:09 GMT

PLUTO IS A PLANET OKAY FINE GREAT

Will Pluto prevail?

PAIGE GARANT,ONTARO CANADA — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 16:35:49 GMT

I THINK PLUTO SHOULD BE A PLANTET BECAUSE IT TRAVELS THE SOLAR THE SOLAR SYSTEM THE SAME AS ALL THE OTHER PALNETS.PLUT HAS BEEN CONSIDRED A PLANET FOR MANY MANY YEARS,I STILL CONSIDER IT PLANET BECAUSE IT ORBITS THE SUN(AS I SAID) THE SAME AS OTHER PLANETS AS THEY TRAVEL AROUND THE SUN.

Will Pluto prevail?

Sam Prescott, Ont. — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 16:44:06 GMT

Pluto should be considerd a planet because any thing that orbits around the sun is a planet.

Will Pluto prevail?

a p garcia — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 19:35:40 GMT

As long as Pluto has a demoted status, then Neil De Grasse Tyson is happy and partying.

Will Pluto prevail?

Don Smith, Tulsa, Ok — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 21:17:40 GMT

I think we should go look... and then decide

Will Pluto prevail?

Helen Williams, Perth, Western Australia — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 06:47:43 GMT

The ancients knew of the planet Pluto, and honored it as such, before the 'intellects' built a device with which to see it.
Pluto is a twin body, with powerful energy and great mystery. It is the weakness of mankind that feels it needs to name and define, in order to control.

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet...

Will Pluto prevail?

Eric Johnson, Concord, NH — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:19:33 GMT

"If something is round, orbits a star (whether eliptical orbit or not), is not a moon, an asteroid, a comet, a meteor, or any type of star it should be a planet!"
I agree with that.
Unfortunately, Pluto should have been dubbed a comet all along.
It's got the same makeup (ice and dirt),
same orbit (elliptical @ 17deg of inclination [all other planets are between 1 and 7, comets are around 20deg inclination]),
and the atmospheric conditions (the atmosphere swells during the perihelion stage so large that the atmosphere encloses Charon) of a comet. The only argument against it being a comet is that it has moons. And since it's the largest comet we've ever seen, that's not much of an argument since there's nothing else to compare it to.
If it looks, smells, acts, and tastes like a comet, it's a comet.
Just because it was classified incorrectly from the start does not mean that the error should go uncorrected.

Will Pluto prevail?

Dan, Hamilton, ON, CDA — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 04:52:59 GMT

Can you all please dedicate this same amount of time to helping me find my carkeys ??
Lost them in '86....behind Pizza Hut....

I Love it. You hit the nail on the head!

BTW Jeff,you never mentioned the make of your car. I might have the keys here.

Dan,Pizza lover