STORM2K

Just reported on CNN. Look at the Breaking News Headline

http://www.cnn.com/

Thunder44 wrote:Just reported on CNN. Look at the Breaking News Headline

http://www.cnn.com/

i was just going to post on this. what a bummer, the astronomy books all have to be reprinted and pluto the dog must feel terrible.

Pluto gets the boot
Pluto no longer a planet, say astronomers

Thursday, August 24, 2006; Posted: 9:32 a.m. EDT (13:32 GMT)


PRAGUE, Czech Republic (AP) -- Leading astronomers declared Thursday that Pluto is no longer a planet under historic new guidelines that downsize the solar system from nine planets to eight.

After a tumultuous week of clashing over the essence of the cosmos, the International Astronomical Union stripped Pluto of the planetary status it has held since its discovery in 1930.

The new definition of what is -- and isn't -- a planet fills a centuries-old black hole for scientists who have labored since Copernicus without one.

Pluto is no stranger to controversy. In fact, it's been dogged by disputes ever since its discovery. (Watch why some think planet size doesn't matter -- 3:39)

Discovered by Clyde Tombaugh of Arizona's Lowell Observatory, Pluto was classified as a planet because scientists initially believed it was the same size as Earth. It remained one because for years, it was the only known object in the Kuiper Belt, an enigmatic zone beyond Neptune that's teeming with comets and other planetary objects.

Pluto got an ego boost in 1978 when it was found to have a moon that was later named Charon. The Hubble turned up two more, which this past June were christened Nix and Hydra.

But in the 1990s, more powerful telescopes revealed numerous bodies similar to Pluto in the neighborhood. New observations also showed that Pluto's orbit was oblong, sending it soaring well above and beyond the main plane of the solar system where Earth and the other seven planets circle the sun.

That prompted some galactic grumbling from astronomers who began openly attacking Pluto's planethood.

At one point, things looked so bad for Pluto, the international union said publicly in 1999 that rumors of Pluto's imminent demise were greatly exaggerated and there were no plans to kick it out of the cosmic club.

A year later, the Hayden Planetarium at New York's American Museum of Natural History was accused of snubbing Pluto by excluding it from a solar system exhibition.

Pluto took another hit after Michael Brown of the California Institute of Technology discovered 2003 UB313, a slightly larger Kuiper Belt object. What's the point, some astronomers wondered, in keeping Pluto as a planet?

Its future brightened earlier this year, when NASA sent the New Horizons spacecraft to Pluto to get a closer look at the ball of rock and ice. The Hubble has managed to glimpse only its most prominent surface features; New Horizons, if all goes well, will arrive in 2015.

Pluto will always be a planet in my book, that is how I was taught, I dont care if the definition says it isnt, IMHO it should stay a planet just because its always been one, at least as long as I've been alive...

I was fascinated by the planets and solar system as a child and even built a model exhibit of the planets for a science project, which of course Pluto was a part of it.

I agree brunota, Pluto will always be a planet for me too. that's just plain crazy talk.

This was a very bad idea...There is no defined limit saying whats a planet in whats not? Where do they draw the line between a darf planet in a planet??? Pluto would of been perfect. Anything better then pluto would of been respectable...Cere should of never been on this list. Thats what killed it for Pluto. In we are finding planets that have obrits like you can't believe worst then pluto's. We may even find planets out in space with no star what so ever.

They will be back in there little discussion in about 20 years saying why o why did we demote Pluto. It makes no sense what so ever its a known world that could of been used for the lower limit. In now theres none. Clearing out stuff out of its way? I'm sure Pluto could clear stuff out of its way so thats blow out of the water.

I just hope they organize these dorf planets like they do the planets so I can look through them. But demoting Pluto was not a good idea....They set out to find something to class planets in now they end up with nothing.

How about everything that is bigger then our moon or bigger that is not around another planet...Can be a planet? In anything that is smaller is a darf planet. I would also say anything smaller then 800 miles di should not be a darf planet because it would make a darf mad. So 800 to 3,000-3,500 di? What do you think about that.

brunota2003 wrote:Pluto will always be a planet in my book, that is how I was taught, I dont care if the definition says it isnt, IMHO it should stay a planet just because its always been one, at least as long as I've been alive...

Well said.

I think Pluto's demise was brought about by the strong, and quite radical, move to have even Pluto's tiny moon Charon (Tiny when compared to other major planetary satellites, I'm aware that proportionately it's rather sizeable) as yet ANOTHER planet, and to make Ceres, clearly an Asteroid body, yet another planet, and the litany went on in such ambiguous terms as to leave it open for a solar system of literally hundreds of planets. If there's anyone to give credit for Pluto's actual "demotion", then give it to those who pushed for this ridiculous new classification system that would have had many, many "planets" less than half the size of half a dozen "moons". It has been argued that Pluto might very well have been the first among the Kuiper Belt objects instead of a true plant ever since that belt was discovered--and I don't think the article went into that enough.

A2K

I read that the "panel of experts" who announced this was rather small, and the greater bulk of the 11,000 astronomers worldwide are registering strong disagreement.

I was pushing for Xena and Gabrielle to be added, personally.

this is so dumb. pluto should stay, xena should have been added

We still love you Pluto!!!!!!! The planet that is.....ok the dog too!!!

I hear the plutonions are pretty upset about this and are trying to get a meeting of the United Planetary Commission to reverse this....

Is this called planitary profiling?????lol

Hey as we learn, old ideas change. Pluto is still out there and we love it, it's just not a "planet". I bet there was a big stink when they found out the world was round too.lol

It's the right call. Members of "belts" should not be planets. Ceres was originally thought to be a planet when she was discovered between Mars and Jupiter, but after discoveries of Pallas, Vesta, Juno, and others, it was realized that they couldn't ALL be planets.

The discovery of numerous bodies beyond Neptune, similiar in size and composition to Pluto is simply a repeat of what happened with Ceres. The differences are, with Ceres there wasn't much time between the discovery of Ceres and the 2nd asteroid (Pallas IIRC) only 1 year, but between Pluto and the 2nd KBO (1992 QB1) there was 62 years passed, and there is much cultural awareness of Pluto, not to mention an element of "picking on the little guy" that goes with any talk of Pluto's demotion. But there is precident for Pluto's demotion and it should be classified as a Kuiper Belt Object, it is only distinguished from the other ones in that it was discovered first.

HOLY HALE-BOPP!! This just can't be happening!

This system won't work for a second...Why because whats a darf planet in whats a planet? You need a limit in pluto should of been it. So this falls flat on its face.

There's nothing wrong with this system at all. Eight planets, 1 Asteroid Belt, and 1 Kuiper Belt with which Pluto is a member is the most sensible arrangement for the Sol System based on our current knowledge, and our precident. Most argumets for keeping Pluto as a planet really don't rely on any science but on the emotional attachment to it's status. There's precident for changing status of objects as more knowledge becomes available.

Wikipedia wrote:Precedents for 'demoting' planets

There is some historical precedent for "demoting" a "planet" in the light of subsequent discoveries. The first four asteroids (1 Ceres, 2 Pallas, 3 Juno and 4 Vesta) were considered to be planets for several decades (in part because their sizes were not accurately known at the time). However, in 1845, the first new asteroid in thirty-eight years was discovered (5 Astraea), just one year before Neptune, and soon every year brought more asteroid discoveries. It was soon recognized that Ceres and the others were just the most prominent members of a populous asteroid belt, and although asteroids are also known as "minor planets", they are no longer considered "planets". Some see in this a precedent for noting that Pluto is just the most prominent member of the Kuiper belt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto#Demotion_to_a_dwarf_planet

PLOOOTS! I'm gonna miss ya baby! You are always welcome in my home, don't worry if those scientists don't want ya as part of their family.

It's a sad day indeed.

-justin-

There is going to be planets found that is going to bust this thing all over the place.

1# Planets moving 5 or 6 SOL in then out from there sun.
2# Planets floating through space.

Planets that are slightly smaller then Mercury. In which will give us a hard time with this thing.

This can only lead to a mess. There is common sense reasons why pluto should remine a planet. Because whats a planet in whats a darf?

I'll obviously lose sleep over this.