• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Pluto officially stripped of its planet status (1 Viewer)

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,321
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Yesterday, the International Astronomical Union finally came up with a definition of planet, ending the ambiguity.

A planet is a celestial body:

A) In orbit around a star.
B) Has sufficient mass for its gravity to make it nearly spherical.
C) Has "cleared the neighborhood" of its orbit, meaning that there aren't any other large objects in its path.
D) Is not a satellite of any other celestial body meeting this definition.


Since Pluto does not meet criterion (C), it was officially stripped of its planetary status yesterday, settling decades of debate. Pluto is now considered a "dwarf planet", which has the same definition of planet except for (C).
 
Last edited:
Well so Plutos gone but arn't there two new ones or are those not in our solar system? Just exactly how many planets are there in our system now?
 
There are eight left. Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune.

There is also Sedna, the planet-like object discovered in 2004. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/90377_Sedna

It's unclear if Sedna qualifies as a planet or not under the new definition. They don't really know much about it yet. I doubt they could definitively say whether it meets item C. in the planet criteria list. Sedna has such a long, elliptical orbit it would be near impossible to tell whether or not its neighborhood has been "cleared" or not. Interestingly, one theory on Sedna's strange elliptical orbit is the existence of yet another, larger planet orbiting on a similar extreme path:

"Another possible explanation, advanced by Gomez, involves a hypothetical distant ‘planet’ (a planetary-sized companion in the inner Oort cloud). Recent simulation show that Sedna's orbit characteristics could be explained by perturbations by a Neptune-mass object at 2000AU (or less), a Jupiter-mass at 5000AU or even an Earth-mass object at 1000AU. [3]"

Looking at how extreme Sedna's orbit is on the accompanying image (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Trans-Neptunian_object_2003_VB12.Sedna.orbit_comparisons.jpg) one can't help but wonder what else might be out there.
 
Gosh there are so many much more interesting and awsome things to focus on in the universe other than whether some beaurocrat decides whether Pluto should be descrbed as a planet :roll:
Compared to the rest of the Universe it's a speck of dust we'll never see, so WTF.
I mean is an O an 0 or is it an o ho ho
 
Last edited:
JSBach said:
Gosh there are so many much more interesting and awsome things to focus on in the universe other than whether some beaurocrat decides whether Pluto should be descrbed as a planet :roll:
Compared to the rest of the Universe it's a speck of dust we'll never see, so WTF.
I mean is an O an 0 or is it an o ho ho

Eloquently put.
 
Kandahar said:
Yesterday, the International Astronomical Union finally came up with a definition of planet, ending the ambiguity.

A planet is a celestial body:

A) In orbit around a star.
B) Has sufficient mass for its gravity to make it nearly spherical.
C) Has "cleared the neighborhood" of its orbit, meaning that there aren't any other large objects in its path.
D) Is not a satellite of any other celestial body meeting this definition.


Since Pluto does not meet criterion (C), it was officially stripped of its planetary status yesterday, settling decades of debate. Pluto is now considered a "dwarf planet", which has the same definition of planet except for (C).


Pluto also does not meet criterion (D) because it is a binary system with it's "moon" Charon. Planets have gravitational dominance over their moons which orbit around said planet. Pluto does not have gravitational dominance over Charon and they orbit eachother.
 
Monkey Mind said:
There are eight left. Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune.

There is also Sedna, the planet-like object discovered in 2004. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/90377_Sedna

It's unclear if Sedna qualifies as a planet or not under the new definition.

Sedna definitely doesn't qualify as a planet, but it may very well qualify as a "dwarf planet" like Pluto. As of now, our solar system has three confirmed dwarf planets: Pluto, Ceres (Asteroid Belt), and Xena (Kuiper Belt).

There are hundreds of more candidates within our solar system for dwarf planet status, but no known contenders for planet status beyond the original eight.
 
Kandahar said:
Sedna definitely doesn't qualify as a planet, but it may very well qualify as a "dwarf planet" like Pluto. As of now, our solar system has three confirmed dwarf planets: Pluto, Ceres (Asteroid Belt), and Xena (Kuiper Belt).

There are hundreds of more candidates within our solar system for dwarf planet status, but no known contenders for planet status beyond the original eight.

Why do you think Sedna definitely doesn't qualify as a planet?
 
Monkey Mind said:
Why do you think Sedna definitely doesn't qualify as a planet?

With a celestial body like Sedna - whose orbit passes through the outer reaches of the Kuiper Belt and most likely extends all the way out to the Oort Cloud - there are invariably going to be many relatively large objects in its orbit. Besides, Sedna is much too small to have the gravitational pull necessary to clear its orbit.
 
It's actually outside the Kuiper belt. But you're right, Sedna's discoverer has also said it won't be named as a planet. His reasoning is that Sedna is part of a population, not a solitary individual as the other planets are.

"Population classification. This definition requires a little more explanation and a little more understanding of the solar system, but, in the end, leads to the most satisfactory definition of "planet". Just like the solar system very naturally divides itself between round objects and non-round objects, it also very naturally divides itself between solitary individuals and members of large populations. The best known example of a large population is the asteroid belt. We call it a population because one region of space contains objects with a continuous range of sizes from one moderately large object (Ceres) to a handful of slightly smaller objects (Vesta, Pallas, Hermione) to a huge number of extremely small objects (rocks, dust particles). The solitary individuals are much different. In their region of space there is only them (Earth, say) and then a collection of much much smaller objects (the near-earth asteroids), with no continuous population in between. A single example helps to dramatize the difference between a continuous population and a solitary individual. Ceres, the largest asteroid, has a diameter of 900 km. The next largest asteroid, Pallas, has a diameter of 520 km. After that is Vesta at 500 km, and Hygiea at 430 km, and the list continues on down. The jump in size between asteroids is never more than a factor of two. In contrast, the earth has a diameter of about 12,000 km, while the largest other object in the earth's vicinity, the asteroid Ganymed, has a diameter of about 41 km, a factor of 300!

Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune all count as solitary individuals by this definition. Pluto and Quaoar do not. Pluto is clearly a member of the Kuiper belt population, as can be seen from the fact that there are objects in the same vicinity slightly smaller than Pluto (Quaoar, 2004 DW, Varuna), and then even a larger number slightly smaller than that, and then on down.

What about Sedna? Sedna is currently the only object known in its orbital vicinity, but we strongly suspect that there will be many others found out there with time. We thus feel it is more reasonable to classify Sedna as a member of a large population (the inner Oort cloud of objects) rather than a solitary object. This classification saves us from having to go back and reclassify Sedna in a decade when we find more objects! "

Source: http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/sedna/#planets

I like this explanation, I think it makes a lot more sense than saying the planet has "cleared the neighborhood of its orbit". Of course, if their assumption turns out to be wrong and there is no population that Sedna is part of, then it really is a planet.
 
The plot thickens...

Harold Weaver, from the John Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory and a New Horizons project scientist, said: "Since many 'Plutinos', including Pluto, cross Neptune's orbit, I'd say Neptune's neighbourhood still needs some clearing."

http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/scitech.cfm?id=1263692006

Obviously Neptune is a planet, so any definition which doesn't include Neptune is flawed.
 
Pluto officially stripped of its planet status idea vetoed by The Warden.

So what? Change the definition and it can be a planet again. Just like it will remain in The Basement. The new official home of the "Pluto is still a planet so says teacher" deal thingy.

And a guy with monkey in his name? Wow. Big shoes to fill. Hope he lives up to it.

I'm procrastinating viewing his posts as if it's weak I'll have to do a horrible thing.

Not that I wont enjoy it but some of you gag when you drive past a pile of guts in the road, and what with my compassionate caring personality it takes some aback when I go to work.

Besides, I'm busy moving blocks next door. Still undefeated and the crusade is gaining steam. Lucky for you I don't post links or I'd show you carnage on a grander scale.

28.JPG

29.JPG
 
Monkey Mind said:
The plot thickens...

Harold Weaver, from the John Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory and a New Horizons project scientist, said: "Since many 'Plutinos', including Pluto, cross Neptune's orbit, I'd say Neptune's neighbourhood still needs some clearing."

http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/scitech.cfm?id=1263692006

Obviously Neptune is a planet, so any definition which doesn't include Neptune is flawed.

Pluto doesn't cross Neptune's orbit. It orbits the sun on a highly inclined plane relative to the planets, as do most (or maybe all) of the plutinos in that region. I think the definition means that there can't be anything big in the orbit of a planet (as every planet has a bit of debris in its orbit). Other plutinos are "big" given the relative small size of Pluto, but they'd be insignificant in the orbit of Neptune.
 
Last edited:
Pluto got stripped of it's planetary status, and Pluto is P!SSED!

Word on the celestial street has it that it's talking grudge match. Might even go retrograde.

Let's face it -- nobody likes to hear words to the effect they aren't big enough, and so we might expect a whoel lot of compensation out of this particular planetissimle. .
 
teacher said:
Yea it do.............

No it doesn't. Just because it's occasionally closer to the sun doesn't mean that they cross paths. If they did, they'd have collided by now.

Pluto and most plutinos orbit the sun on a completely different plane from the planets.
 
Hm, let's see.. a respected scientist from the John Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory says the plutinos do cross Neptune's orbit. Kandahar says they don't.. :roll: Got anything to back up that assertion?
 
Monkey Mind said:
Hm, let's see.. a respected scientist from the John Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory says the plutinos do cross Neptune's orbit. Kandahar says they don't.. :roll: Got anything to back up that assertion?

Kandahar said:
Pluto and most plutinos orbit the sun on a completely different plane from the planets.

Learn to read, and save the condescending hostility for the political boards. This is the Science & Technology board for chrissake.

It is physically IMPOSSIBLE for Pluto to cross Neptune's orbit for all these millions of years without colliding with it. It doesn't take, well, a rocket scientist to see that.

http://www.solarviews.com/eng/solarsys.htm

This page shows that Pluto's inclination is 17 degrees relative to Earth's. That is enormous. All the planets are roughly on the same orbital plane, including Neptune (1 degree). Therefore the orbits don't cross, or come anywhere near each other.
 
Last edited:
Dwarf Planets are Planets too!

Danny Devito is gonna kick some arse.
 
Kandahar said:
Learn to read, and save the condescending hostility for the political boards. This is the Science & Technology board for chrissake.

That statement was beautifully ironic. Thank you.

It is physically IMPOSSIBLE for Pluto to cross Neptune's orbit for all these millions of years without colliding with it. It doesn't take, well, a rocket scientist to see that.

http://www.solarviews.com/eng/solarsys.htm

If you click on the "Pluto" link on the website above that you referenced, you might find this paragraph:

"Pluto crossed Neptune's orbit January 21, 1979, made its closest approach September 5, 1989, and remained within the orbit of Neptune until February 11, 1999. This will not occur again until September 2226."
 
Arch Enemy said:
Dwarf Planets are Planets too!

Danny Devito is gonna kick some arse.
Speaking of Danny Devito, I helped Mara Wilson move into my dorm today...
 
Hook, line and sinker.

My shortest post ever should have been a clue.

How many times do I have to tell you unwashed masses that if you bite when I'm trolling (fish, not internet) get it right.

But as I'm a busy man what with my "teacher's pyramid crusade and traveling menagerie", Billo watch, and the Monkey Army, I'd still make time to make you next. What saved you is that Gardener (who I love like a bastard son beget from a fat chick while on a 3 day everclear and Viagra bender) and Monkey Mind (who gets slack and attention while I determine if he's worthy of having "Monkey" in his name, and so far so good, he's right about this, he didn't bite on my cast, and, well...he's got monkey in his name) are on this and I want to see how they do. (If you screw his up boys I'll have to show you how it's done.) [I hope they screw it up.] One of you do this by logical deductive detailing and not links with wit and I'll be not only be not impressed but I'll claim a freak typo.

Them, and me generally cutting girls slack (which is illogical as I too can make babies, a nice dinner, change my mind for no apparent reason other than to be difficult, say things like "if you don't know why then I'm not telling you", and foolishly farding (who knows without looking up?) while driving) is why I'll be nice.

Kandahar said:
No it doesn't.

That's final. Not many things can be said final. "Water is wet". "Tashah sneaks looks at my TT's and giggles her mother ****ing *** off". "I'm the Warden, you're not and can never be". "I used to move safes". Those can be said.

I was short laying bait because I wanted to see if you knew this...

Kandahar said:
Just because it's occasionally closer to the sun doesn't mean that they cross paths.
So I could determine if you can think for youself and with spacial relations, mechanical reasoning and imagination avoid saying things like this...

Kandahar said:
If they did, they'd have collided by now.

You even self smacked by adding...

Kandahar said:
Pluto and most plutinos orbit the sun on a completely different plane from the planets.

Implying that that means they can't meet.

Now why have I been noticed by teacher you ask? Well, besides this thread being next to the most astounding internet forum thread ever and the chance that some of the guests coming to view that will see this and become even further annoyed at me making my crusade even more challenging and fun, the fact that I can come here and do the forum equivelent of playing catch with my bastard son, and, well...Monkey, is that you list as a Libertarian yet say things like this...

Kandahar said:
Learn to read, and save the condescending hostility for the political boards. This is the Science & Technology board for chrissake.

As I'm the perfect Libertarian and think the best defintion of one is Neil Boortz's "one who thinks if it don't interfere with your life, liberty or property then shut up" kinda paints you a liberal eh?

This is going easy you say?

Yes.

No drawings walking though logic use to determine facts, no cartoons...

Easy.

Your turn.
 
Monkey Mind said:
That statement was beautifully ironic. Thank you.



If you click on the "Pluto" link on the website above that you referenced, you might find this paragraph:

"Pluto crossed Neptune's orbit January 21, 1979, made its closest approach September 5, 1989, and remained within the orbit of Neptune until February 11, 1999. This will not occur again until September 2226."

That means that it was closer to the sun than Neptune, not that it physically crossed Neptune's orbit. Christ, how hard is it to understand that two objects can't cross each other's orbit without colliding? I can assure you that there's no traffic light in deep space.

Do you not understand the concept of orbital inclination? Methinks not.
 
The do not pass through the exact same point in space which has kept them from crashing. When looking at diagrams of their orbits it's important to remember space has 3 dimensions while the picture you're looking at has two.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom