Pluto rises again

Josh Levin — Sat, 27 Jan 2007 05:21:35 GMT

I feel that the IAU's denigration of Pluto was a slap at the United States. After all, Pluto was the only planet discovered by an American! I think they felt they could get away with it because of the decline in U.S. prestige due to the failed policies of George W. Bush. Perhaps President Bush should go to Pluto and make a personal apology.

Pluto rises again

Craig from Seattle — Sat, 27 Jan 2007 22:38:34 GMT

Is this a science mission or a PR farce? This guy is obviously suffering from "Planet envy".

Pluto rises again

Chris Eldridge, Harrisburg PA — Sat, 27 Jan 2007 23:15:34 GMT

Do you mean the group Incapable of Astronomical Understanding (IAU)? :)

The only other thing I find “irrelevant” and costly is an 800 million flyby probe to Pluto of all places. In other words, NICE PR CAMPAIGN! WRONG TARGET! The contrast of a four-year ORBITER mission to Mars by the new recon probe is about 20,000 times more valuable and the VLTI will likely be able to measure Pluto’s atmosphere long before the probe ever even gets there. In a time when all space science funding is on hold, this was a big mistake! Europa mission is now on hold and any hope for a space interferometer is another 20 years away.

Pluto rises again

Will Mari, Seattle, WA — Sun, 28 Jan 2007 05:40:36 GMT

I think the mission to Pluto is quite important; indeed, the only way to determine Pluto's status might be through the New Horizons visit. And, lest we forget, another important part of the NH probe's agenda is looking at some of the other heretofore unaswered questions about Kuiper Belt objects.

Pluto rises again

Sick of Whining — Sun, 28 Jan 2007 14:56:43 GMT

Good god. There's just some people who can't discuss anything without somehow turning it into another Bush gripe.

Pluto rises again

Carolyn Fikes — Sun, 28 Jan 2007 17:01:36 GMT

Leave Pluto alone. Give scientists an empty room, fill it with more scientists and they will nit-pick something to death until they find fault somewhere. Pluto was the target this time. LEAVE PLUTO ALONE.

Pluto rises again

Jay Carr, Grand Rapids, MI. — Sun, 28 Jan 2007 21:55:34 GMT

Pluto is obviously different from the other planets. Its orbit is inclined to the average plane of the other planets, and its orbit also brings it closer to the Sun than Neptune for part of the time. I am for the removal of Pluto from the list of planets.

Pluto rises again

Jim Carlisle — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 03:57:41 GMT

And let's Guess, if the Earths Orbit was not perfect, it would not ba a planet either?... Sorry, I think all people are doing is just Complaining... it would be one thing if it was a Planet that we could settle on, but it's just a Rock that has been called a planet. Let it keep its name, and Status.

Pluto rises again

Al Corsin, France — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 07:56:54 GMT

An interesting so called imaginated mendeleevian schema are figured in "Traité pratique d'astrologie" by Andre Barbault ,pp 119-124, Seuil Editions, 1961

After this author, in addition to Pluto, another nondiscovered planet must exist ! (supposed as Proserpine)

In this astrological approach the twelved based mathematical equilibrium may come complete & harmonique. Sun + Moon as luminary, Mercury, Venus, Terra, Mars, Jupiter, Saturne, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto making 11. For having an complete explanation of some astrological senses an interpretation, a planet are losing to complete 12 !!

But astrology is not .....science for scientist !!!

Maybe in the future !?

Pluto rises again

Mikako O from S. Korea — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 11:12:22 GMT

I just don't get why all this planet thing is being debated upon NOW, when we really should be worrying more about the state of EARTH, our HOME planet (sound familiar?). We have more to cope with here, such as famine, global warming, oil and gas depletion, child mortality rates, AIDS, etc etc. And besides, whether Pluto is or is not a planet is not really going to make a huge impact on our lives as we know it, except we'll have to change the acrostic "My very educated mother just served us nine pizzas", Right?

Pluto rises again

Wade Whitlock, Aberdeen, MD — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:36:17 GMT

For once (red letter day! ;)), I must disagree with Chris. Actually, Pluto is a planet by the Greek definition (planetes = wanderer) and it is big enough to have the gravity to make it round. Plus it has three (3) moons. Besides, the so-called Grand Tour was short-circuited and missed out on a fly-by of Pluto. About time we get a good look at the thing. It is the last of the pre-Hubble "Planetes" to be visited, after all.

Mars ain't all that wonderful. To terra-form the thing might require hauling in quite a few Kuiper belt objects to supply water and other organics. Then, after things settle down (you don't even think we could soft-land a comet, do you?) we could get to work. The dust would literally be settled! After a few hundred years of establishing Terran micro and then macro biology you might be able to step outside, enjoy the blue sky and take a deep breath! All you need on Pluto is a reactor, an insulating blanket and an atmospheric dome! That could be done in one trip.

I doubt that Pluto is upset or concerned. I somehow doubt that it is sentient. Let's not wander into anthropomorphy, shall we? We could settle on Pluto, but it would be one cold and lonely outpost! "The Forever War" has an interesting take on establishing bases on such bodies. Consider the fun that you might have with cryogenic helium!

Pluto rises again

Eric Johnson, Concord, NH — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 14:06:05 GMT

Pluto has the inclination of a comet, the orbit of a comet, the makeup of a comet, and the atmospheric properties of a comet. So that makes it a planet, right? Get serious.

The only reason it was ever called a planet is because they were looking for a planet when it was found.

Pluto rises again

Astrochronic — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 15:29:40 GMT

Its very simple. Pluto and its moon orbit each other, Pluto has an elliptical orbit that is on an angled plane, Pluto's atmosphere changes from gas to solid, and Pluto is a Kuiper belt object. Pluto is also not gravitationally sphereical.

There is a reason stony planets are closer to the sun than Gas planets and there is a reason Pluto is at the back of the class. Earth, Venus, Mars and Mercury were formed over time after our Sun was born. Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune and Uranus condensed further out because the energy of our Sun pushed the Gas further out than the rocky bodies. (Although it is not necessarily the rule that all Gas planets form at such distances from thier parent star.) I believe this sort of solar system organization is ideal and indicative of harmony (thus allowing life to emerge). Pluto just happened to get grabbed out of the Kuiper belt and does not lend its origin to our star.

I grew up believing Pluto was a planet. Children will be somewhat stigmatized by the lack of integrity and edification in our scientific declarations. But that does not mean we should alter our perception according to our errors. What I mean is we should not alter our logic in order to validate a previous mistake. I will miss Pluto. Perhaps it could be given an honorary planetary status much like celebrities get honorary degrees with out haveing earned them. That way we can go on to classify other planets in other solar systems without any controversy.

Pluto rises again

Piffy — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 15:33:12 GMT

Jim Carlisle: Your initial question is like asking; I guess if humans had gills we wouldn't be mammals? Duh. There is obviously more critieria than simply the concentricity of orbit.

Pluto rises again

Deborah Byrd — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 15:36:08 GMT

The arguments for and against planethood for Pluto are reasonable on both sides. But I think the IAU made a mistake. They had a chance to give us a new planet ... to get people excited about astronomy! Instead, they chose to decide in such a way that our solar system now has 8 planets instead of 9. That feels wrong. It feels contrary to the role of astronomy in our human culture. Astronomy is supposed to expand our horizons, not limit them! I suspect this controversy ... now that it's started ... will go on for some years. Thanks, Alan, for mentioning Earth & Sky's blog!

http://www.earthsky.org

Pluto rises again

James Acuna — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:21:31 GMT

When Pluto was first discovered in 1930, it fit every criteria of 'planet' at that time, required by the scientific community. It was an amazing find and rightly celebrated the world over.

Fast forward... so we have better tools now. So What?

Should we downgrade the Brooklyn Bridge or Empire State Bldg, because they are no longer the greatest engineering feats by today's architectural standards? The IAU needs to get a grip. Some things need to be left alone. Pluto earned its place in history, even if the bar has been raised a few measly decades later.

Pluto rises again

Eric, Fort Worth Texas — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 18:39:38 GMT

I agree with Deborah Byrd. The IAU could easily create a new class of planets, Kuiper planets in addition to the inner (terrestrial) and outer (gas giant) planets. Being alive at a time that more planets are being found is exciting!! Let's pass that excitement on the next generation of space scientists.

Pluto rises again

Jason, Phoenix AZ — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 19:26:30 GMT

Do we still call the Earth flat, even though it has been shown to be round? Do we still say the Sun orbits the Earth, even though we now know it's the other way around? If something has been shown not to fit common thinking, the common thinking has to change. In science, it is not okay to let something continue to be discussed incorrectly just because people are comfortable with how it used to be perceived.

Long ago, people were jailed, or worse, for trying to make such changes. I guess it's an improvement that now people just make fun of them (e.g. "Irrelevant Astronomical Union"), but in the end, it will be clear that removing Pluto from planethood was the right thing to do.

Now, does that mean that I agree with the IAU's definition of a planet? Not really... it needs a lot of work. But should the final definition be one that excludes Pluto and other Kuiper belt objects? Definitely.

And guess what? Pluto and its friends will still be there regardless of what we call them. They'll still be just as cool and exciting, too. Objects like Pluto will continue to be found and they will always be exciting, whether or not they are called a planet. We should be focused on the discoveries and on the science, which starts with solid, working definitions of that which is being studied. To start with old-fashioned definitions that clearly no longer work would be to handicap the science from the get-go.

Let's call them what we really know they are and get back to the science!

Pluto rises again

karen, Tucson, AZ — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 20:22:52 GMT

Scorpios are quided by the planet Pluto. What will we do without any guidance?

Pluto rises again

Jeff, New Haven, CT — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 20:51:39 GMT

The classification of Pluto does not matter, get a grip, people! From a scientific point of view, classifying it as a planet or a dwarf planet does NOT make it any more or less important of a solar system object. This is pure sematics, people and unfortunately, it actually affects the small minds of the people who write the checks to fund such missions. Miss Pluto? It's not going anywhere!

Reclassifying Pluto does not change the fact that it is among the largest of the Kuiper Belt objects, the fact that it's moon is almost half it's size makes it unique in the solar system. The Pluto Express mission is every bit as important, if not moreso now that other Pluto-like objects have been discovered.

Pluto rises again

Pi Draconis, Indianapolis, Indiana — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 21:05:56 GMT

Can't we just add Ceres and Eris--hey, that rhymes! And have 11 planets? My Very Ecclectic Mother Can Just Shut Up--No Pizza Either! That fits!

Pluto rises again

Guy S. Newell — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 21:08:50 GMT

Now that's amazing. Blaming the demize of Pluto on President Bush. Any president with that much influence will definitely be vindicated by history.

Pluto rises again

Chris Eldridge, Harrisburg PA — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 21:51:56 GMT

Jason of Phoenix writes, "should the final definition be one that excludes Pluto and other Kuiper belt objects? Definitely"

Um... there are an estimated TRILLION 1-meter wide kuiper belt objects. To propose lumping Pluto in with all of them is not a realistic categorization. The most obvious definition for a planet is any body that is round regardless of its orbit (free-floating planets included). The IAU is dead wrong and they are more than aware of it. There definition doesn't even hold sway to exoplanets or free floating planets and was an off-the-hip response that chose to ignore their own three year study on the matter. Their argument hints that Pluto is still a protoplanet which after 4.5 billion years is preposterous.

Hi Wade! I, too, think Pluto as well as other new planets should be visited in time. I would have much rather saved up for a robus orbitor mission than a mere flyby one. At the very least the probe heading there should be carrying those ground penetrators they tried on Mars. I was also hoping that they would wait until a survey of the other solar system was more complete. That way they could have tried more of a grand tour if that was possible.

For the money, I really would rather see us focusing on worlds where life might exist, but that seems to be taboo for NASA right now. ESA has no such problem and I commend them for their work! Thanks for the vote of confidence BTW :)

Pluto rises again

~J Faircloth — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 19:44:42 GMT

Odd how many think Pluto should be discluded because of its oddities - size, orbit, inclination & makeup being different, et al. Name ANY Solar System planet that is like another! I agree with Dr. Stern - the IAU can vote on anything they like. But rest assured the IAU doesn't represent ME -- Pluto will ALWAYS live in MY universe!

~J Faircloth
Star*Hub Observatory
'Down East', NC - USA

Pluto rises again

Oris Bracken — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 22:47:06 GMT

My thoughts are with Deborah and Eric of Ft Worth, a new class of planets. Also, IAU could have voted among all members via email, not just those who could attend a conference.

Question if Ceres and Eris should be on the list.

A mission designed to explore Pluto and its moons is our gift to a future generation. And, hey, my name is on board :)

Pluto rises again

David Parsons — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 23:22:58 GMT

Someone please correct me if I am wrong. The I.A.U. now calls Pluto a dwarf planet? I am not much for the english language but they are still calling it a planet. What am I missing here?

Pluto rises again

Chris Eldridge — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 10:03:04 GMT

David Parsons, Pluto is NOT a planet in their definition of the word but is actually 'called' a dwarf planet anyway which I guess was done to help appease people who like to think of it that way. There actually lies a large part of the problem. They not only contradict themselves but would (under these new rules) have to call even a JOVIAN-size planet a ‘dwarf planet’ if it did not clear its own orbit. It’s the most bogus thing one has ever heard. There are several scenarios where you could find very large Jovian planets in orbits so far from their sun (from 5 to 50,000 AU - if a sun captured a free floating planet) that they’d NEVER have a chance to clear such a distant orbit because it take so long. Their definition also doesn’t account for the possibility that even Earth itself could one day be thrown out of its present orbit if a large body passed too close to it (say Jupiter itself ‘migrating’ towards the sun as they think happens in some other solar systems). Earth’s new orbit would obviously not be cleared for tens of millions of years so earth too would become a “Dwarf [not-so-planet] planet.” In a nut shell, they goofed and they know it!!

Pluto rises again

David, Dothan, AL — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 16:04:08 GMT

Wow, it is even Bush's fault Pluto was demoted! You anti-Bush guys have a serious mental disorder. I have another theory. The international scientific community likes the idea of voting for science. Because voting (consensus) is the only way they can "prove" global warming and extort money from rich countries for their socialist causes.

Pluto rises again

Des Emery, St. Thomas, ON, Canada — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 05:09:04 GMT

David from Dothan -- Bush should be kept out of any discussion of science. He probably thinks that Pluto is Mickey Mouse's dog, anyway, and would have nothing constructive to add to this blog.

Pluto the planet has had his day in the sun, so to speak, and it is time for him to bow out gracefully. I think he will ultimately be discovered to be one of the larger asteroids, a surviving piece of what would have been the fifth planet formed between Mars and Jupiter. I explore the possibility in my blog, The Carborundum Chronicles.

Pluto rises again

Kinsale, Atlanta, Georgia — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 17:54:07 GMT

"Pluto has the inclination of a comet..."
Huh? All comets have the same inclination? Hardly. Pluto's orbit is closer to the ecliptic than many comet orbits.

"...the orbit of a comet"...
Really? Its orbit brings it close enough to the Sun that it develops a tail? Gee, I didn't know that.

"... the makeup of a comet..."
You know what Pluto is made of? Even though planetary researchers aren't sure themselves? Call a press conference. Alert the IAU. We don't need space probes anymore, we have someone here who just 'knows' things.

"...and the atmospheric properties of a comet."
No doubt you are talking about the atmosphere that helps form Pluto's enormous tail.

Pluto rises again

JC, Fairbanks, AK — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 22:55:01 GMT

I think people should decompress about the “planet or not a planet” issue. It is a fact that scientists need precise definitions for terms like ‘planet’. But none of this argument changes history (ie. that Clyde Tombaugh discovered the ninth PLANET) or in any way alters what Pluto, physically, is.

As for it being a political issue, the very idea is preposterous.

Pluto rises again

AT, Calgary, AB — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 19:06:48 GMT

I think the IAU was dipping into dangerous territory by demoting Pluto. It was wrong. Who knows? Maybe one day it will be proven Pluto really is a planet

Pluto rises again

Seth Deitch, Cambridge, Ma — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 11:29:15 GMT

One thing that has been in no way effected by the demotion (If you insist on calling it that ) of Pluto is Pluto. It is still there in the outer reaches of our solar system and will continue to be there for quite some time. What we choose to call it does not alter it in any way. We could define Pluto as an apple or a transistor radio and it would still somehow continue to be exactly what it is. It bodes poorly that so many are willing to allow a traditionalist view be their guide in this. Tradition is always going to be overturned in science as new things are learned.

Pluto rises again

Laurel Kornfeld, Highland Park, NJ — Sun, 11 Feb 2007 23:12:00 GMT

The definition of something is more important than many people think. How many of us learned about Ceres in grade school? After it was demoted from planet to asteroid, it fell into oblivion for most of the general public. This is very clearly not something that should be repeated with Pluto. Deborah and Eric have the most sensible answer, that the IAU should create a new class of planets known as Kuiper Belt planets. This situation not one of an object, Pluto, not fitting the current thinking because the definition of planet is not a clear black and white, right vs. wrong issue. It's something even planetary scientists cannot agree on, with many experts such as Dr. Stern making sound arguments for why Pluto does in fact meet the criteria of being a planet. I applaud Dr. Stern for his efforts and wish him much success in getting this sham of a vote overturned.

Pluto rises again

Paul S, Cedar Rapids, IA — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 00:57:57 GMT

My opinion holds true with J Faircloth. Pluto will always be a planet to me. To hell with anyone (that includes the IAU) who tries telling me different. I grew up in a school that taught me that there were 10 total bodies in our solar system worth remembering: The Sun, Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and PLUTO. Our Star and it's 9 moons who just happened to be classified by planets in our tiny little minds. On a galactic scale, Earth is nothing more than a moon to our star, the Sun, and Pluto no more than the tip of a needle. Hate to tell you this, but I'm not thinking on said galactic scale. I'm thinking on the human scale. And to me, Pluto's a planet on that scale. Regardless of who says it's not.

To those of you who did vote and those of you who agreed with those who voted that Pluto is no longer a planet, I say this to you:

Congratulations on castrating a part of the place where you live in this messed-up universe of ours. It's one more thing you get to think negatively about on top of all the other bull#@%* that is going on. It's also one more thing the media gets to blow out of proportion because they don't already have enough negativity to throw at us. When was the last time you genuinely saw something positive in the news?

Pluto rises again

Anjulee Gunther,Washington,DC — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 22:13:15 GMT

I think pluto sould be a planet even if it is small.I think that because if you were small you wouldn't like it if you wouldn't be able to go somwhere or do somthing.
By:Anjulee in 4th grade

Pluto rises again

David Bellomy, Grayson, KY — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 06:32:41 GMT

I'm with David Parsons. In English a "Dwarf (whatever)" is still a "whatever", therefore, "Dwarf Planets" are planets. If the IAU wants to say they are not planets, then they shouldn't have the word in the name. Or should we stop calling "Dwarf Humans" "humans"?