Pluto is no longer a planet!
-
BTW the new definition sucks. u bet many astronomers are gonna protest this.
For example the "cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit" rule doesnt work well. Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Neptune orbits are still full of small asteroids. Jupiter has 2 groups of Trojan asteroids 60degrees in front and behind in its orbit.
So are we gonna be left with 4 planets?
wonder what went wrong during the convention. everybody drunk? -
maybe they will put Earth as the super exclusive group because its the only planet which can support life on it?
-
7:30 got show abt dis. 4got which channel.
-
channel news asiaOriginally posted by Hello Kitty:7:30 got show abt dis. 4got which channel. -
ok, so when are we singing Aung Lang Sye for Pluto?
Let's have a bachelor's party for our Pluto buddy and havok the night away. -
pluto is still a dog's name
-
isn't it a ball of gases?Originally posted by lpx88:Actually also makes sense...if i remember corectly its just a rock of ice...no core also...might a rock thats chipped off from UR-anus -
I think they meant crossing into another planet's path and not asteroids... All the other planets have their own orbit space where as Pluto's crossed into Neptune's.Originally posted by sgquitter:BTW the new definition sucks. u bet many astronomers are gonna protest this.
For example the "cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit" rule doesnt work well. Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Neptune orbits are still full of small asteroids. Jupiter has 2 groups of Trojan asteroids 60degrees in front and behind in its orbit.
So are we gonna be left with 4 planets?
wonder what went wrong during the convention. everybody drunk?
picture from nightzip.
-
actually as long as it have its own orbit around our SUN, it can be termed as a planet...why must be dwarf planet?
just becos it part of its orbit crossed into neptune's, pluto's status have to be demoted...their reasoning cannot be understood...
it goes to show that scientists, astronomers findings and theories cannot be believed...dey can change anytime they feel like it... -
Mr Brown ver
http://media.libsyn.com/media/mb/tmbs-060828-pluto_not_a_planet_anymore.mp3
chao keng pluto!!!! still downgrade...... -
nope. it goes to show how stupid u are. u don't even know what is happening. u don't score well for science huh?Originally posted by numby:
actually as long as it have its own orbit around our SUN, it can be termed as a planet...why must be dwarf planet?
just becos it part of its orbit crossed into neptune's, pluto's status have to be demoted...their reasoning cannot be understood...it goes to show that scientists, astronomers findings and theories cannot be believed...dey can change anytime they feel like it...
just the other day i was discussing with someone regarding this recent change in definition, and i was saying that many (stupid) people will get the WRONG impression that it is a MISTAKE by the science community. seems like the worry is not unfounded
juz for the sake of letting u know so that u won't mislead more people (n embarrass urself):
- if everything orbiting our SUN is termed a planet, i think we will have 1000s of planets, including asteroids, comets, etc. So when do we call a piece of rock in space a planet? this is exactly what the astronomers are doing right now - to lay down the precise rules in their definition.
- scientists/astronomers findings are based on evidence. Does this recent change suggest that Pluto is NOT there anymore? Of coz NOT! Pluto is still there just that the astronomers don't want to classify it as a planet anymore.
The wonderful part about science is that it encourages challenges and updates. With improved modern technologies, we get to know more about the world we live in, and then we can refine our understanding of it. if science does not challenge and update our people, then u should start to worry! We will not know the truth, and probably still thinking that Earth is flat and Sun revolves around us.
ps > i had to use harsh words to wake u up.
-
Originally posted by zocoss:
If they meant crossing into another planet's path, then they should juz say that and not "clearing the neighbourhood blah blah" which is very ambiguious and not precise. but then again, how to decide which planet's path is being crossed? Can it be Neptune crossing Pluto's path? There should be more description regarding the definition of the "proper" orbit and such.
I think they meant crossing into another planet's path and not asteroids... All the other planets have their own orbit space where as Pluto's crossed into Neptune's.
yup i know about pluto's eccentric orbit, but i'm hoping for more precise definitions. if they don't do this well, we will have problems in the future, esp the classification of planets in other star systems... -
they are scared of retaliation from some people who wants pluto to remain as a planet.. abit hum.Originally posted by sgquitter:If they meant crossing into another planet's path, then they should juz say that and not "clearing the neighbourhood blah blah" which is very ambiguious and not precise. but then again, how to decide which planet's path is being crossed? Can it be Neptune crossing Pluto's path? There should be more description regarding the definition of the "proper" orbit and such.
yup i know about pluto's eccentric orbit, but i'm hoping for more precise definitions. if they don't do this well, we will have problems in the future, esp the classification of planets in other star systems...
dats why kept changing for past few times. at first they say pluto remains as a planet a couple days later, changed again. which is good la actually, as long this definition sticks. -
No la.. They were partially right about it. They had to demote Pluto as otherwise they had to "add" over 40 objects to over solar system thus making it to a total of about 50 Planets! Thus its better to just demote Pluto rather and have 8 planets then have over 50 planets.Originally posted by sgquitter:BTW the new definition sucks. u bet many astronomers are gonna protest this.
For example the "cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit" rule doesnt work well. Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Neptune orbits are still full of small asteroids. Jupiter has 2 groups of Trojan asteroids 60degrees in front and behind in its orbit.
So are we gonna be left with 4 planets?
wonder what went wrong during the convention. everybody drunk?
Our technology wasn't good enough last time and hence we never knew that there were other objects which were like Pluto except further away from Sun.
Hence now Pluto joins Ceres (between Mars and Jupiter) and UB 313 as the Dwarf Planets.
I was interviewed by Straits Times regarding this yesterday =) They will be publishing an article about this on this coming Sunday's paper =) See if you guys can correctly guess my name.. -
so what's Pluto now
-
dwarf planet.Originally posted by finoq:so what's Pluto now -
The classification has yet to be made more precise in my view as well.Originally posted by sgquitter:If they meant crossing into another planet's path, then they should juz say that and not "clearing the neighbourhood blah blah" which is very ambiguious and not precise. but then again, how to decide which planet's path is being crossed? Can it be Neptune crossing Pluto's path? There should be more description regarding the definition of the "proper" orbit and such.
yup i know about pluto's eccentric orbit, but i'm hoping for more precise definitions. if they don't do this well, we will have problems in the future, esp the classification of planets in other star systems...
Right now they are looking for roughly these primary aspects before classifying an object as a planet:
It's orbit around Sun should be at least roughly circular. (How roughly? They never say :/) Pluto's orbit is extremely eccentric when compared in relation with the other planets.
Its orbit should be clear of other major objects. (What is exactly meant by Major Objects?) Pluto crosses Neptune's orbit.
The planet should have a certain size? What size again? o.0 Pluto is about 2274km in diameter while our Moon is over 3476km in diameter!
Also another thing I would add will be the plane of the orbit of the planet. All the planets (pluto is not a planet) are circulating around Sun in roughly the same planes. But our dear Pluto is in its own plane completely. Let me show this in the following picture:
As you can see, the inclination of Pluto's orbit is totally off.
That could have been another reason.
But yeah, they should give out proper figures in my opinion. -
Who cares lah. The only thing that was changed is how we classify the planets. Pluto will still remain as pluto for as long as it or us exist.
-
haha! Yeah I was thinking in the same line too.. Its not as if Pluto has vanished or what...Originally posted by aiglosicicle:Who cares lah. The only thing that was changed is how we classify the planets. Pluto will still remain as pluto for as long as it or us exist. -
no body listen to this one is it?Originally posted by duotiga83:Mr Brown ver
http://media.libsyn.com/media/mb/tmbs-060828-pluto_not_a_planet_anymore.mp3
chao keng pluto!!!! still downgrade...... -
i did, not really that funny.Originally posted by duotiga83:no body listen to this one is it? -
All my teachers lied to me
See, they dont intend to teach me the right thing from the start.
-
Originally posted by coolgeek84:
yup i know about pluto's weird orbit and angle. I've been very keen in astronomy since my primary school days ( >_<" that's 20+yrs ago... duh)
The classification has yet to be made more precise in my view as well.
Right now they are looking for roughly these primary aspects before classifying an object as a planet:
It's orbit around Sun should be at least roughly circular. (How roughly? They never say :/) Pluto's orbit is extremely eccentric when compared in relation with the other planets.
Its orbit should be clear of other major objects. (What is exactly meant by Major Objects?) Pluto crosses Neptune's orbit.
The planet should have a certain size? What size again? o.0 Pluto is about 2274km in diameter while our Moon is over 3476km in diameter!
Also another thing I would add will be the plane of the orbit of the planet. All the planets (pluto is not a planet) are circulating around Sun in roughly the same planes. But our dear Pluto is in its own plane completely. Let me show this in the following picture:
As you can see, the inclination of Pluto's orbit is totally off.
That could have been another reason.
But yeah, they should give out proper figures in my opinion.
last i checked, they did not want to use size to classify a planet. and the final definition did not touch on the angle of the orbital plane (and imo is a wise choice not to be limited by this). In fact, its not far-fetched to say Pluto is part of the kuiper belt.
page down to the bottom for the final definition, and also the section on "Criticism of final vote". The final definition is really very badly done imo...
The Final Definition:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_redefinition_of_%22planet%22
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Astrology ( <-- NOT ASTRONOMY and definitely NOT SCIENCE) (well, maybe it is most suitable to call it a "con-business" )
the funniest part is "Some astrologers were unhappy that they were left out of the discussion"... LMAO
and Jane Spencer (2006-08-25). Pluto's demotion divides astrologers, troubles Scorpios.
lol... i think they should say Pluto's demotion troubles astrologers (and their wallets ) -
Yep they didn't touch on it. I did. lol. If you read my post again I said that "I will add on" or something like that. I am still in Astronomy =)Originally posted by sgquitter:last i checked, they did not want to use size to classify a planet. and the final definition did not touch on the angle of the orbital plane (and imo is a wise choice not to be limited by this). In fact, its not far-fetched to say Pluto is part of the kuiper belt.
Pity the astrologers as now they can't base their predictions on the nine planets anymore.. -
oic, i thought that u were saying those were part of the definitions. :pOriginally posted by coolgeek84:Yep they didn't touch on it. I did. lol. If you read my post again I said that "I will add on" or something like that. I am still in Astronomy =)
Pity the astrologers as now they can't base their predictions on the nine planets anymore..
IMHO, the definitions should take into consideration planets in other star systems. if the angle of orbital plane rule is added, then it might affect the classifications of these "would-be" planets and we'll be back in square one. Pluto might be the odd one out in our solar system but who knows there might be many oddities in other star systems.
Very glad to find a enthusiast!!
ps > i always had to explain to people the difference between astronomy and astrology >_<"