pluto demoted as a planet

[DarkSerge]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14489259/?GT1=8404

they desided to reclassify pluto as a dwarf....why did it take them so long to do it anyways? what do you guys think of this anyways?

[MathUser]

I been hearing our solar system might undergo a massive change. They are coming up with a new definition which under it's definition would classify the Moon as a planet also. I think the new definition is sposed to bring up the number of planets to 20 or something.

I think it is interesting and am wanting to study about the new planets when they are pointed out, and what their names are. I think alot of people won't like this tho. They liked it to be 9 planets.

[Lazy Bastard]

I know they weren't sure if they should call its moon a binary planet (with it), so I'm not too surprised.

[MathUser]

I should of read that link before I posted. It looks like its resolved, so we got 8 planets, and some dwarf planets. I think that is better than getting 12 planets instead.

[Chaotic Forces]

It seems wrong to me, I can understand that it was in debate but I hope this around they stick with it.

[KrowKnight]

i agree it is wrong everything we learned in school is now shot to hell

[Chaotic Forces]

Well the Irish school system doesn't teach us about planets, well we did learn there is nine planers and according to a former teacher and text book, Mercury(sp) is the hottest planet.

[KingEdgar0]

I'm fine with it.

Everything we learned in school is not shot to hell. You just have to remember that pluto is a dwarf planet. Not that hard.

I would have welcomed the resolution either way, either the 12 planet model or the new 8 planet model, as both get the damn thing done with and let the astronomers go back to studying the objects instead of arguing about how to define them. It should be noted that they did not -change- the definition of planet. It didn't actually have a definition to begin with. They gave it a definition.

I have a couple problems with resolution 5A (the one that passed that made pluto a dwarf planet instead of a planet). Here is the actual resolution:

" RESOLUTION 5A
The IAU therefore resolves that planets and other bodies in our Solar System be defined into three distinct categories in the following way:

(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. "

I don't like (a), as it means that similar objects orbiting other stars do not fall under the definition. I would have prefered it said "a star" instead of "the Sun". The way it is worded now means that there are 8 planets in the universe, and all of them orbit our sun.

I also don't like (c), as it doesn't clearly define what the neighborhood is. How big is the neighborhood? Is it a set size? Does it depend on the size of the object being examined?

Besides those gripes I am happy with how things turned out.

[Lazy Bastard]

Agreed; the very least they could do is not capitalize "Sun", heh.

[Chaotic Forces]

I never liked the number 9, I prefer 8 planets.
On a more serious note, I think that we need a set size for the neighborhood, that remains constant as oppesed to changing it around every few days/weeks/months/years.