Pluto Not a Planet?

Should Pluto stay planet or be labeled a Dwarf?

Planet
48 votes
Dwarf Planet
38 votes

Only members can vote.

This thread is closed for posting.

page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 Next » 77 total items

EarthAngel1

EarthAngel1

Hero's Aren't born their made

Cancel

Hi everyone i was reading the news and saw the report about pluto not really being a planet so scientist have decided to call it a dwarf planet which means it's a small planet that rotates around a bigger planet now after all the decades does this really make any sense to any of you i mean with all the big problems on earth right now does any one really care about something so pointless and about a planet so far away we'll probarly never reach it in this lifetime. What's you take on this issue?

  • Aug 25, 2006

somebodyelse

Retired Moderator

somebodyelse

Pacman's mouthpiece

Cancel

This news just made my day. lol

Quote: Hi everyone i was reading the news


The news: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/24/science/space/25pluto.html?hp&ex=1156478400&en=f662a15c093b5844&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Personally this makes my day because if scientists can decide that their 1930 predecessors were wrong about the number of planets there are and what constitutes a planet, then they can call themselves out on any number of scientific things that are currently "unquestionable." Basically I see it as a reform to keep there from being a ridiculous amount of "planets" when we find out what other space junk is floating around outside Pluto's orbit. (They've already found one: this "Xena.")

Quote: with all the big problems on earth right now does any one really care about something so pointless and about a planet so far away we'll probarly never reach it in this lifetime. What's you take on this issue?

As for it being "pointless": I'll bite. In defense of the scientific spirit, there's many other things that have been considered "pointless" and have since borne astonishing practical fruit. It was once considered pointless to try and make something heavier than air fly; now 103 years after a couple guys in North Carolina went ahead and did it, travel and commerce have been revolutionized forever; if I need to be in, say, Taiwan or Europe as fast as possible, taking an ocean barge would be pointless. It was considered pointless by some to try and put artificial satellites in space; now if all of our satellites fell out of the sky, hundreds of millions of cell phone owners would howl in dismay.

Concerning the 'planets' ruling: the biggest immediate impact is that they'll have to reprint all the schoolbooks and scientific texts/posters saying there's 9 planets. ;) So it could be considered pointless now, but in the long run? You never know.

And who really cares? Well, obviously ^^ those guys do. XD

Signature Image
"Searchin' for my lost shaker of salt..." -Jimmy Buffett

Aoi Nishimata goodies! Check my gallery out!

Silverwolf12

Silverwolf12

Ed's love

Cancel

I say Pluto is a planet, it has 2 moons.

  • Aug 25, 2006

Claa

Claa

Girl Strange

Cancel

*Ad: Brazilian girl passing in english forums... xD*

It's a little bit sad to see the planet of my sign (Scorpio) being desclassificated from the "Planets", but I really liked the fact that we did another scientific discover.
I can't consider something like astrology pointless. Every kind of information can be a plus to you someday. In this point of view, I agree with somebodyelse... xD

Ayamael

Ayamael

yumemitai

Cancel

OMG! I'm a Scorpio! This means my main guiding planet is no longer a "planet" T_T.... This is sooo bad! And what about poor Sailor Pluto?

XD So here's my 2 cents:

First:

Quote by Silverwolf12I say Pluto is a planet, it has 2 moons.


Actually, Pluto would have 3 moons according to this:

Quote by http://www.nineplanets.org/pluto.htmlIn late 2005, a team using the Hubble Space Telescope discovered two additional tiny moons orbiting Pluto. Provisionally designated S/2005 P1 and S/2005 P2, they are now known as Nix and Hydra.


One of those satellite is, as everyone knows I bet, almost as big as Pluto itself: Charon. Since Charon is almost as big as Pluto and doesn't move in Pluto's point of view (that is, like our moon, it always shows the same face to Pluto, and it is always at the same point in Pluto's sky), at some point, scientists were debating whether to call Pluto a planet or a double planet with Charon. So really, whether Pluto is a planet or not was always a question of debates, and no source seemed to agree.

So, I think it's fine that scientists finally gathered to discuss about the definition of the word "planet" Even if it means Pluto is no longer considered a planet. It doesn't mean it'll interest scientists any less.

Quote by somebodyelse
Concerning the 'planets' ruling: the biggest immediate impact is that they'll have to reprint all the schoolbooks and scientific texts/posters saying there's 9 planets. ;) So it could be considered pointless now, but in the long run? You never know.


LOL, that ought to make some people happy, and some other very unhappy... I don't know about your schools, but here, in Quebec at least, it seems teachers and school boards are constantly trying to look for reasons to change their schoolbooks every year, only to annoy students even more because it forces them to buy the brand new book instead of finding a second-hand book. ^_^' Now, schools will have just the perfect reason in their hands to change some of them. ~_~

And like somebodyelse, I don't think it's pointless to finally agree on a definition to the word planet. Sure, there are very bad things happening in the world at this time, but so are there every day of every year. If scientists stopped working everytime there's a war, a famine, an epidemy, a natural cataclysm... then they'd never be able to work, and we'd never push the frontiers of science, never improve healthcare and so on. Hell, if we talk about pointless things, I think it would be best to stop Hollywood from making movies first, since that really doesn't bring any improvement to our lives. They only give us a few hours of distraction... That's just an example of course, I like watching movies just as much as the next person. ;)

Besides, as a translator, language is very important to me, and everything related to words and their definitions as well. Just that new definition that clarifies the word "planet" could prove to simplify my work by a whole lot if ever I have to translate a document on that subject. Imagin, before we didn't know if Pluto was a planet, a planetoid, etc... To make it worst, each clients had their own opinion on the issue. So for one client, I would have needed to use the term "double planet", and for another, it would have been "planet". Imagin how puzzling that can be!

EDIT: shoot Claa was faster than me on the Scorpio comment. I typed too much I guess. ^_^'

Cancel

Quote by somebodyelseThis news just made my day. lol

Personally this makes my day because if scientists can decide that their 1930 predecessors were wrong about the number of planets there are and what constitutes a planet, then they can call themselves out on any number of scientific things that are currently "unquestionable." Basically I see it as a reform to keep there from being a ridiculous amount of "planets" when we find out what other space junk is floating around outside Pluto's orbit. (They've already found one: this "Xena.")

Scientists pride themselves on being able to accept when they were wrong. Simply because they found out they were wrong when they were 100% sure they were right doesn't mean all they deem "unquestionable" is wrong as well. It means they say "Hey, we were wrong - but we found out the real answer. Here it is." Its how we progress in knowledge...setting theories and laws, and adjusting them as we get new information.

  • Aug 24, 2006

ChronicX

ChronicX

Beholder of the Behold

Cancel

Well.... as long as pluto moves around the orbit of the sun it can be considered a planet. That's the definition of a planet isn't it?

Cancel

Quote by ChronicXWell.... as long as pluto moves around the orbit of the sun it can be considered a planet. That's the definition of a planet isn't it?


But the pluto's orbit is a little different from others planets...

  • Aug 24, 2006

kiokorenay703

kiokorenay703

Dasha Denger

Cancel

yeah well everyting has been said already ^^' but i still think that Pluto is a planet since it does have moons. like someone already have said. I takled about that in my History clas tday, it was very intereting, but yeah you are right! What does it mean to call something that meaning less a plane or not, if the OUR planet has so many problems. I think they should worry about that first, and then in a milliom years after they reached Pluto, to condust that its not a living planet, it doesnt have a core.... Well anyways thanks for this threat! XD its was fun!
LuVe
~Kioko~

Cancel

Quote by ChronicXWell.... as long as pluto moves around the orbit of the sun it can be considered a planet. That's the definition of a planet isn't it?

Are comets planets? Does the asteroid belt contain thousands or millions of planets? They all "move around the orbit of the sun".

Ayamael

Ayamael

yumemitai

Cancel

Quote by ChronicXWell.... as long as pluto moves around the orbit of the sun it can be considered a planet. That's the definition of a planet isn't it?


Sounds like you didn't read the article to get the information and the new definition scientists agreed upon, or even the dictionary definition for that matter, because if your description defined "planet", then every objects in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, and those in the Kuiper belt, and so on could be called "planets". :sweat:

So, here is the real definition, and why Pluto can no longer be considered a planet :

Quote by http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/24/science/space/25pluto.html?hp&ex=1156478400&en=f662a15c093b5844&ei=5094&partner=homepage
According to the new rules a planet meet three criteria: it must orbit the Sun, it must be big enough for gravity to squash it into a round ball, and it must have cleared other things out of the way in its orbital neighborhood. The latter measure knocks out Pluto and Xena, which orbit among the icy wrecks of the Kuiper Belt, and Ceres, which is in the asteroid belt.

sukumei

sukumei

Running A Critiquing Service

Cancel

Its a freakin planet alright but maybe we should consider Charon as a planet as well. For those who dont know, Charon is Plutos moon.

I would like to run a friendly critiquing service for Minitokyo artists. I will try to make my opinions professional and defiantly unbiased although i will speak ideas for the general public. Critiquing service MT thread

  • Aug 24, 2006
Cancel

It sounds funny...dwarf planet. JAJA. I do think ppl have more important things to do in life than caring about that, but...it some ppl's lives to find out stuff like this. It is a very interesting discoverment. It will make schools buy more science books and publishing houses to update their books. I think is not like WOW, OMG! but its...umm...interesting and important to know. And I kinda like the new name, is funny..lol

miffedplatypus

miffedplatypus

fenixreborn

Cancel

Quote by sukumeiIts a freakin planet alright but maybe we should consider Charon as a planet as well. For those who dont know, Charon is Plutos moon.

Technically, it could be considered a double planet because of Charon being about the same size. But it's orbit isn't exactly right to consider it a planet. It didn't move stuff out of the way.

"Mythology is psychology misread as biography."-Joseph Campbell
"Logic will get you from A to Z; imagination will get you everywhere."
— Albert Einstein
"A room without books is like a body without a soul."-Cicero

joycev

joycev

the PS3 with boobs & personality

Cancel

Quote by ChronicXWell.... as long as pluto moves around the orbit of the sun it can be considered a planet. That's the definition of a planet isn't it?


You cant consider everything with an orbit a planet. The sun and all the other stars and such in the galaxy cant be considered planets even though they orbit the center of the galaxy. You have to take into consideration that Pluto's orbit is different than all the other planets' as well.

Quote by Silverwolf12I say Pluto is a planet, it has 2 moons.


Mercury and Venus have no moons of their own, yet they are still considered planets, so the amount of moons orbiting something have nothing to do with it's planetary status.

Signature Image

  • Aug 24, 2006

speedfreek19

speedfreek19

Belldandy Fanboy

Cancel

Well PLuto is actually smaller than our moon, but even so, leave it as a planet \o/

what will us scorpio's do? ._.

anyway apparently Pluto's moons are larger than itself

Signature Image

fluke

fluke

What once was good enough...

Cancel

Part of the debate was that it had to have it's own gravitational pull to be considered a planet. I heard that part on the radio, this is quite a fascinating discussion indeed, I may have to go and read up a bit...but off the top of my head, couldn't several "moons" of Jupiter be considered "dwarf planets" on their own. I am thinking probably not because the revolve around a planet and not a star.

So does Charon and Pluto orbit themselves? If they are each the same size they should have roughly the same gravitation pull...which I like the idea of calling it a "double planet". Just sounds neat.

Edit:

Found some info on 4chan (hard to believe that, hehe)

Quote: RESOLUTION 5a
(1) A "planet" is a celestial body that
(a) is in orbit around the Sun,
(b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and
(c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit.

(2) A "dwarf planet" is a celestial body that
(a) is in orbit around the Sun,
(b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape,
(c) has not cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit, and
(d) is not a satellite.

(The eight planets are: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune.)


RESOLUTION 6a
Pluto is a "dwarf planet" by the above definition and is recognized as the prototype of a new category of trans-Neptunian objects.

http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/5619/planetshc3.th.jpg

Cancel

Isn't this a nice reminder of a fascinatind field : astronomy... even if like most of the members I haven't an imediate use about the definition of planet...

So now Pluto isn't officially a planet anymore. That's a bit weird since we have been taught the former but science's strong point is to take something as true as long it isn't proven wrong... even if in this case it was just a matter of definitions.

Signature
	Image
Thanks to GothicMike for making my avatar and signature.

Member of : Renegade Fighter ~ Anime Paradise ~ Death-Note

  • Aug 24, 2006
Cancel

Pluto and Charon revolve about a mutual center of mass. This occurs not just for these two objects, but it also occurs with the Earth and the Moon and between the entire planetary system and our Sun. Evidence of this lies in observation of neraby stars that have a "wobble" this indicates that such stars are perturbed by the gravitational tug of objects orbiting about that star.

Regarding the four major moon of Jupiter, though they are larger than Earth's moon they are classified as moons because that mutual center of mass that Jupiter and all of its 16+ moons revolve about lie within the diameter of Jupiter itself.

Signature
	Image[/img]

  • Aug 24, 2006

koohyuko

Nandeyanen?

Cancel

I like the idea of Dwarf planet. We needed an official definition of a planet, and now we have one. A dwarf planet is fine with me. Pluto crossed Neptune's orbit, which was a little weird in the first place. Another thing I like about this ruling: Had Pluto been accepted as a planet, so would 1 Ceres, Charon, and 2003UB313(dubbed Xena). That would bump the count to 12.

  • Aug 25, 2006

Astrologica

Astrologica

Sorry, I'm in another castle.

Cancel

(Astrology parenthesis)
Leo and Cancer are governed by the Sun and the Moon and those aren't planets, yet astrology considers them. The same can be said about Pluto, it's still considered. ^^
According to some texts there's two planets (or celestial objects) to be discovered and given to Taurus and Virgo, since they share Venus and Mercury with Libra and Gemini.
It doesn't matter that much what astronomy decides, since it's a separate thing from astrology (though they are very linked)
Also, I'd like to stick with the old relations...
Sun-Leo, Mercury-Gemini-Virgo, Venus-Taurus-Libra, Moon-Cancer, Mars-Aries-Scorpio, Jupiter-Sagittarius-Pisces, Saturn-Capricorn-Aquarius.
Astrology accomodates by itself very easily...
(end of Astrology parenthesis)

With that said, I saw Pluto being kicked out of the planet's society ages ago, when I started getting interested in astrology and by inertia I had to read some bits of astronomy (which has always been interesting to me ^^)

gaaaaa~

ericcarson

ericcarson

Anime Addict

Cancel

While i do not wish to appear un-educated, Why not call it a Planetoid? In casual talk that is usually the term for such objects like abnomally large asteroids, or non moon/planet objects.

- Your sourse for quality scans! 2000x3000 or greater!

Support our troops. I need a loan... LOL j/k

Cancel

I think Pluto is a planet cuz it has moons and its been in our solar system forever,so why take it out now?

e.g' green, e.g.' brown, e.g,'yellow

  • Aug 25, 2006

Ayamael

Ayamael

yumemitai

Cancel

Quote by Tohru1994I think Pluto is a planet cuz it has moons and its been in our solar system forever,so why take it out now?


What kind of argument is that? Yes, maybe it does have moons, but has been in our solar system forever? So has the sun, and it's still a star! Besides, Pluto was found only in 1930, so its addition to the planet family is fairly recent.

page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 Next » 77 total items

Back to General Discussions | Active Threads | Forum Index

Only members can post replies, please register.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Read more.