Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

More on the Pluto-Kuiper Express

Posted by michael on from the stopping-at-chambers-and-14th-st dept.

addie writes "Scientific American has a great, extensive article about Pluto and the possibilities of exploring it in the near future. Neat descriptions of Kuiper Belt and what we can learn about solar system birth and growth from the tiny planet."

7 of 89 comments (clear)

  1. Planet Pluto: A Planet-Earth Myth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Rare is the occurance of a false-scientific conspiracy. What am I referring to, you
    ask? I refer to the existance (or, lack of) the "Planet Pluto." Supposedly "discovered"
    in 1930 by Astronomer Clyde Tombaugh by accident, was merely a clever story to claim
    credit for a "new planet" and scientific presidence. The pure and simple truth is the
    FACT that the planet Pluto does not exist. The reason for orbital disturbances beyond
    the planet Neptune are explained in a rather simple non-planetoid manner. Rather than
    a planet-sized mass made mostly of frozen water, methane and carbon-oxygen compounds,
    a more plausable suggestion is a mobile gravity well or dark matter pocket of
    comperable space-distortion magnitude. Contrary to popular belief and physical
    evidence, the Oort cloud does not possess any other masses similar in magnitude to
    "Pluto." In fact, the second largest Oort fragment is all but .00012% in mass
    magnitude, compared to what is known as "The Planet Pluto." The assertion that a
    mysterious ball of ice exists by itself beyond a real gas planet [Neptune] with no
    subsequent balls of ice similar size-magnitude beyond this supposed "planet."

    As far as optical "evidence" is concerned, Oort fragments aligning in a per-chance
    optical arrangement distort sunlight in a manner that appears planetoid, but is really
    rather faint to be considered a "planet." Reconsider your universe: Pluto does not exist.

  2. Pluto: An Academic Farce by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    The occurrance of a false-scientific conspiracy is rare. What am I referring to, you
    ask? I refer to the existance (or, lack of) the "Planet Pluto." Supposedly "discovered"
    in 1930 by Astronomer Clyde Tombaugh by accident, was merely a clever story to claim
    credit for a "new planet" and scientific presidence. The pure and simple truth is the
    FACT that the planet Pluto does not exist. The reason for orbital disturbances beyond
    the planet Neptune are explained in a rather simple non-planetoid manner. Rather than
    a planet-sized mass made mostly of frozen water, methane and carbon-oxygen compounds,
    a more plausable suggestion is a mobile gravity well or dark matter pocket of
    comperable space-distortion magnitude. Contrary to popular belief and physical
    evidence, the Oort cloud does not possess any other masses similar in magnitude to
    "Pluto." In fact, the second largest Oort fragment is all but .00012% in mass
    magnitude, compared to what is known as "The Planet Pluto." The assertion that a
    mysterious ball of ice exists by itself beyond a real gas planet [Neptune] with no
    subsequent balls of ice similar size-magnitude beyond this supposed "planet."

    As far as optical "evidence" is concerned, Oort fragments aligning in a per-chance
    optical arrangement distort sunlight in a manner that appears planetoid, but is really
    rather faint to be considered a "planet." Reconsider your universe: Pluto does not exist.

  3. Planet Pluto: Don't Believe The Lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    The occurrance of a false-scientific conspiracy is rare. What am I referring to, you
    ask? I refer to the existance (or, lack of) the "Planet Pluto." Supposedly "discovered"
    in 1930 by Astronomer Clyde Tombaugh by accident, was merely a clever story to claim
    credit for a "new planet" and scientific precedence. The pure and simple truth is the
    FACT that the planet Pluto does not exist. The reason for orbital disturbances beyond
    the planet Neptune are explained in a rather simple non-planetoid manner. Rather than
    a planet-sized mass made mostly of frozen water, methane and carbon-oxygen compounds,
    a more plausable suggestion is a mobile gravity well or dark matter pocket of
    comperable space-distortion magnitude. Contrary to popular belief and physical
    evidence, the Oort cloud does not possess any other masses similar in magnitude to
    "Pluto." In fact, the second largest Oort fragment is all but .00012% in mass
    magnitude, compared to what is known as "The Planet Pluto." The assertion that a
    mysterious ball of ice exists by itself beyond a real gas planet [Neptune] with no
    subsequent balls of ice similar size-magnitude beyond this supposed "planet."

    As far as optical "evidence" is concerned, Oort fragments aligning in a per-chance
    optical arrangement distort sunlight in a manner that appears planetoid, but is really
    rather faint to be considered a "planet." Reconsider your universe: Pluto does not
    exist.

  4. Win vs lin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Win vs lin shows common tasks and how they are done in Linux and Windows. you will soon see why linux sucks!

    2 Install a program

    Win
    double click on setup.exe
    click yes yes yes ignoring all the Eulas and click the program on the start menu.

    Lin
    Either
    rpm -i(U)vh program.rpm

    or
    tar xzvf program.tar.gz
    cd program-dir
    ./configure
    make
    make install

    and don't forget to edit your wmrc with your favourite text editor to get it in the menus :).

  5. Pluto: The Ultimate Astronomical Deceit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    The occurrance of a false-scientific conspiracy is rare. What am I referring to, you
    ask? I refer to the existance (or, lack of) the "Planet Pluto." Supposedly "discovered"
    in 1930 by Astronomer Clyde Tombaugh by accident, was merely a clever story to claim
    credit for a "new planet" and scientific precedence. The pure and simple truth is the
    FACT that the planet Pluto does not exist. The reason for orbital disturbances beyond
    the planet Neptune are explained in a rather simple non-planetoid manner. Rather than
    a planet-sized mass made mostly of frozen water, methane and carbon-oxygen compounds,
    a more plausable suggestion is a mobile gravity well or dark matter pocket of
    comperable space-distortion magnitude. Contrary to popular belief and physical
    evidence, the Oort cloud does not possess any other masses similar in magnitude to
    "Pluto." In fact, the second largest Oort fragment is all but .00012% in mass
    magnitude, compared to what is known as "The Planet Pluto." The assertion that a
    mysterious ball of ice exists by itself beyond a real gas planet [Neptune] with no
    subsequent balls of ice similar size-magnitude beyond this supposed "planet."

    As far as optical "evidence" is concerned, Oort fragments aligning in a per-chance
    optical arrangement distorts sunlight in a manner that appears planetoid, but is really
    rather faint to be considered a "planet." Reconsider your universe: Pluto does not
    exist.

  6. Exposing The Lie Which Is "Pluto" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    This is a fair and accurate rebuttle which provides evidence to the contrary concerning the planet Pluto:

    The occurrance of a false-scientific conspiracy is rare. What am I referring to, you
    ask? I refer to the existance (or, lack of) the "Planet Pluto." Supposedly "discovered"
    in 1930 by Astronomer Clyde Tombaugh by accident, was merely a clever story to claim
    credit for a "new planet" and scientific precedence. The pure and simple truth is the
    FACT that the planet Pluto does not exist. The reason for orbital disturbances beyond
    the planet Neptune are explained in a rather simple non-planetoid manner. Rather than
    a planet-sized mass made mostly of frozen water, methane and carbon-oxygen compounds,
    a more plausable suggestion is a mobile gravity well or dark matter pocket of
    comperable space-distortion magnitude. Contrary to popular belief and physical
    evidence, the Oort cloud does not possess any other masses similar in magnitude to
    "Pluto." In fact, the second largest Oort fragment is all but .00012% in mass
    magnitude, compared to what is known as "The Planet Pluto." The assertion that a
    mysterious ball of ice exists by itself beyond a real gas planet [Neptune] with no
    subsequent balls of ice similar size-magnitude beyond this supposed "planet."

    As far as optical "evidence" is concerned, Oort fragments aligning in a per-chance
    optical arrangement distorts sunlight in a manner that appears planetoid, but is really
    rather faint to be considered a "planet." Reconsider your universe: Pluto does not
    exist.

  7. Pluto - The scientific debate. Mod Up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    The occurrance of a false-scientific conspiracy is rare. What am I referring to, you
    ask? I refer to the existance (or, lack of) the "Planet Pluto." Supposedly "discovered"
    in 1930 by Astronomer Clyde Tombaugh by accident, was merely a clever story to claim
    credit for a "new planet" and scientific presidence. The pure and simple truth is the
    FACT that the planet Pluto does not exist. The reason for orbital disturbances beyond
    the planet Neptune are explained in a rather simple non-planetoid manner. Rather than
    a planet-sized mass made mostly of frozen water, methane and carbon-oxygen compounds,
    a more plausable suggestion is a mobile gravity well or dark matter pocket of
    comperable space-distortion magnitude. Contrary to popular belief and physical
    evidence, the Oort cloud does not possess any other masses similar in magnitude to
    "Pluto." In fact, the second largest Oort fragment is all but .00012% in mass
    magnitude, compared to what is known as "The Planet Pluto." The assertion that a
    mysterious ball of ice exists by itself beyond a real gas planet [Neptune] with no
    subsequent balls of ice similar size-magnitude beyond this supposed "planet."

    As far as optical "evidence" is concerned, Oort fragments aligning in a per-chance
    optical arrangement distort sunlight in a manner that appears planetoid, but is really
    rather faint to be considered a "planet." Reconsider your universe: Pluto does not exist.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]

    Pluto's Attitude (Score:2, Funny)
    by The Famous Brett Wat on Monday May 06, @04:46AM (#3468611)
    (User #12688 Info | http://www.epsilon.com.au/~famous/)

    Pluto has been fairly bitter about our attitude toward it in times past. The Brunching Shuttlecocks [brunching.com] have interviewed Pluto on two previous occasions [ first interview [brunching.com], second interview [brunching.com] ], on the second of which it complained about the lack of attention we've been giving it, and also claimed to support life. I wonder whether these latest developments will change its tune at all.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]

    Planet Pluto: Don't Believe The Lies (Score:-1, Troll)
    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 06, @04:49AM (#3468614)

    The occurrance of a false-scientific conspiracy is rare. What am I referring to, you
    ask? I refer to the existance (or, lack of) the "Planet Pluto." Supposedly "discovered"
    in 1930 by Astronomer Clyde Tombaugh by accident, was merely a clever story to claim
    credit for a "new planet" and scientific precedence. The pure and simple truth is the
    FACT that the planet Pluto does not exist. The reason for orbital disturbances beyond
    the planet Neptune are explained in a rather simple non-planetoid manner. Rather than
    a planet-sized mass made mostly of frozen water, methane and carbon-oxygen compounds,
    a more plausable suggestion is a mobile gravity well or dark matter pocket of
    comperable space-distortion magnitude. Contrary to popular belief and physical
    evidence, the Oort cloud does not possess any other masses similar in magnitude to
    "Pluto." In fact, the second largest Oort fragment is all but .00012% in mass
    magnitude, compared to what is known as "The Planet Pluto." The assertion that a
    mysterious ball of ice exists by itself beyond a real gas planet [Neptune] with no
    subsequent balls of ice similar size-magnitude beyond this supposed "planet."

    As far as optical "evidence" is concerned, Oort fragments aligning in a per-chance
    optical arrangement distort sunlight in a manner that appears planetoid, but is really
    rather faint to be considered a "planet." Reconsider your universe: Pluto does not
    exist.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]

    Win vs lin (Score:-1, Troll)
    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 06, @04:51AM (#3468615)

    Win vs lin shows common tasks and how they are done in Linux and Windows. you will soon see why linux sucks!

    2 Install a program

    Win
    double click on setup.exe
    click yes yes yes ignoring all the Eulas and click the program on the start menu.

    Lin
    Either
    rpm -i(U)vh program.rpm

    or
    tar xzvf program.tar.gz
    cd program-dir
    ./configure
    make
    make install

    and don't forget to edit your wmrc with your favourite text editor to get it in the menus :).

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]

    Pluto: The Ultimate Astronomical Deceit! (Score:-1, Troll)
    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 06, @04:54AM (#3468617)

    The occurrance of a false-scientific conspiracy is rare. What am I referring to, you
    ask? I refer to the existance (or, lack of) the "Planet Pluto." Supposedly "discovered"
    in 1930 by Astronomer Clyde Tombaugh by accident, was merely a clever story to claim
    credit for a "new planet" and scientific precedence. The pure and simple truth is the
    FACT that the planet Pluto does not exist. The reason for orbital disturbances beyond
    the planet Neptune are explained in a rather simple non-planetoid manner. Rather than
    a planet-sized mass made mostly of frozen water, methane and carbon-oxygen compounds,
    a more plausable suggestion is a mobile gravity well or dark matter pocket of
    comperable space-distortion magnitude. Contrary to popular belief and physical
    evidence, the Oort cloud does not possess any other masses similar in magnitude to
    "Pluto." In fact, the second largest Oort fragment is all but .00012% in mass
    magnitude, compared to what is known as "The Planet Pluto." The assertion that a
    mysterious ball of ice exists by itself beyond a real gas planet [Neptune] with no
    subsequent balls of ice similar size-magnitude beyond this supposed "planet."

    As far as optical "evidence" is concerned, Oort fragments aligning in a per-chance
    optical arrangement distorts sunlight in a manner that appears planetoid, but is really
    rather faint to be considered a "planet." Reconsider your universe: Pluto does not
    exist.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]

    Great, (Score:0)
    by sirius_bbr (emschepers.home@nl) on Monday May 06, @05:12AM (#3468641)
    (User #562544 Info)

    I always wanted to know more about that cute cartoon dog of Micky Mouse. You know, about it's birth and growth and stuff. And about his belt too!

    Don't see the scientific aspect, though ;)

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]

    Pluto, the fake planet (Score:-1)
    by rapevictim (feedback@goatse.cx) on Monday May 06, @05:12AM (#3468642)
    (User #557748 Info | http://www.goatse.cx/loopback.jpg)

    The occurrance of a false-scientific conspiracy is rare. What am I referring to, you
    ask? I refer to the existance (or, lack of) the "Planet Pluto." Supposedly "discovered"
    in 1930 by Astronomer Clyde Tombaugh by accident, was merely a clever story to claim
    credit for a "new planet" and scientific precedence. The pure and simple truth is the
    FACT that the planet Pluto does not exist. The reason for orbital disturbances beyond
    the planet Neptune are explained in a rather simple non-planetoid manner. Rather than
    a planet-sized mass made mostly of frozen water, methane and carbon-oxygen compounds,
    a more plausable suggestion is a mobile gravity well or dark matter pocket of
    comperable space-distortion magnitude. Contrary to popular belief and physical
    evidence, the Oort cloud does not possess any other masses similar in magnitude to
    "Pluto." In fact, the second largest Oort fragment is all but .00012% in mass
    magnitude, compared to what is known as "The Planet Pluto." The assertion that a
    mysterious ball of ice exists by itself beyond a real gas planet [Neptune] with no
    subsequent balls of ice similar size-magnitude beyond this supposed "planet."
    As far as optical "evidence" is concerned, Oort fragments aligning in a per-chance
    optical arrangement distorts sunlight in a manner that appears planetoid, but is really
    rather faint to be considered a "planet." Reconsider your universe: Pluto does not
    exist.

    [ Reply to This | Parent ]