Slashdot Mirror
New Tenth Planet Has a Moon
starexplorer writes "SPACE.com is reporting that the recently discovered 10th planet of our solar system has a neighbor - a moon. The discovery team also have nicknamed the planet 'Xena' and the moon 'Gabrielle'. Many scientists are objecting to whether the new planet really is a new planet - so what do you call a moon with no planet?"
Do people never think about why the flimsy pieces of metal flying about above us are called what they are? The answer to your question is: A satellite.
That's no moon?
what is it? Some kind of giant space station?
If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
so what do you call a moon with no planet?
a space station?
A body that orbits another body is a satellite in all cases. It is a moon if the body it orbits is a planet. Either "Xena" is a planet, or Pluto isn't (in which case Charon isn't a moon, either). The really interesting question for me is whether there are a lot more planet-sized bodies so far outside the ecliptic.
An endless barrage of tired Death Star jokes?
so what do you call a moon with no planet?
Easy, you call it Gabrielle.
Words: (C) 1997 by Tom Smith
Music: "Calypso" by John Denver
To surf on the net, or to surf TV channels,
Over and over, there's been one request:
It's Xena we want, the Warrior Princess,
At least Gabrielle, and we want them undressed.
Now, I have to admit, they're not unattractive,
But if we're talking fantasies, I want the best.
Aye, Callisto, I think that I love you,
You psycho bitch leather queen killer bombshell.
Hai, Callisto, I sing to your spirit,
I'm doing it now, 'cause you're going to Hell.
Ai-yi-yi!
Whoh-ooh-ohh...
Ai-yi-yi!
Whoh-ooh-ohh...
I've noticed a trend in the Xena fan-fiction:
Our heroes are lesbians, friendly and more...
Meanwhile, on the show, they're all into bondage,
Shackles, and leather, and sex on the floor.
If these two trends combine, we'll get... Mistress Callisto...
Enslaving our heroes...
Aye, Callisto, put Xena in irons,
I hope you take Gabrielle over your knee,
But, why, Callisto, does Xena obsess you?
You do it to her, but I wish it was me.
Aye, Callisto, I think that I love you,
You psycho bitch leather queen killer bombshell.
Hai, Callisto, I sing to your spirit,
An hour with you would be worth any Hell.
Ai-yi-yi!
I-I-olous -- wait, that's the other show...
Ai-yi-yi!
Whoh-ooh-ohh...
--
Evan
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
so what do you call a moon with no planet?
:) Nerds!
I don't know, but I've got a lot of names to call scientists who want to name a planet and moon after tv characters.
"What do you think?" "I think 'What, do you think?!'"
"so what do you call a moon with no planet?"
How about "Ellen Degeneres"?
"Don't let fools fool you. They are the clever ones."
moonis aplanetus ! uhm...yeah....
For some reason, there has been a bit of a dispute about what constitutes a planet vs. an asteroid, comet, other thing orbiting the sun, etc. Some astronomers have said the origin of the object should decide, others give maximum orbital eccentricities and size, etc.
Here is an easy idea for what should be called a planet, that is a somewhat "natural" definition. We first noticed planets were different from stars because we could resolve them into DISCS, not merely points of light - in other words, (aside from being close) planets are ROUND. This is not just an accident, but an indication that they had sufficient gravity to pull themselves into such a shape; thus their surfaces at some point were probably molten, there was a chance for various elements to sort into layers, etc. So why not just say if it's big enough to have pulled itself into a spherodial shape, and it's orbiting the sun, it's a planet?
You've got style, man! .Sig included. Thanks for posting this.
:) Xena and Gabrielle were babes.
They'll never keep those names but it's fun for now.
Asparagus has many and excellent powers.
I think it would be great if the open source developer community would have access to this new moon for advancement of social ideals. Due to its distance from the sun, the OSS community would be able to develop quicker applications (CD-cataloguing software, MP3 skins, and of course C compilers) due to the closeness to absolute zero which would allow them to overclock their AMD-DX4-100 to reach 1GHz speeds.
It would send a clear message to NASA which has monopolized space exploration to distant planets in the last 30 years especially after the failure of keeping the mock moon landing secret within the American public.
Only when we release the shackles from our DeCSS developers can we overcome tyranny of the RIAA.
Which is nice.
It doesn't have to be a moon and a planet. It could be any pair of freely mutually orbiting objects. We're for choice and an inclusive definition of the solar system.
Why do I have this suspicion that if we google the discovering astronomer and Xena and Gabrielle we'll find some 10 chapter epic slash involving the two amazons meeting Catwoman and Buffy the Vampire Slayer?
"Gabrielle, this armor... chafes!"
"Oh look, Xena! A hot spring! Here, let me help you off with that..."
*Shudder*
What is music when you despise all sound?
Probably, we need to have a lot more terminology to describe satellites orbiting other objects. The terms "irregular moon", "regular moon" and "outcast moon" already exist. There are satellites of moons and also binary systems where objects sort of orbit each other. It will probably be another decade before concensus develops on all this.
I mean come on, the moon is blond and has a great caboose. The planeet looks like it would kick the crap out of me.
Unit
Recently we all discussed this very topic. However, as I stated in that thread, a planet should be defined as something above a certain mass, certain shape, with a certain type of orbit. This new planet (which I read about months ago) should definately be a planet in our star System. Not only that but what was the name of that other planet that was just slightly smaller than Pluto? Quotar? I think.
:)
Anyway, Xena (as bad as the name) should definately be considered a planet, especially since it has a moon, AND is bigger than a body that was considered a planet in the past anyway.
However, like I said Xena is a horrible name, I suggest: Apollo
-- Josh
"Whoopie! Man, that may have been a small one for Neil, but that's a long one for me!" - Pete Conrad
As far as I known, Xena (2003 UB313) is not a planet yet.
Mike Brown, who discovered it said "If Pluto is a planet, so is 2003 UB313". (And he said 6 months earlier that Pluto should not be considered a planet !)
But in fact, they are both transneptunian objects. Along with some big ones we discovered earlier like Quaoar and Sedna. So what's the difference with Xena ? It's that Xena is the first transneptunian object larger than Pluto. But note that it's possible to have transneptunian objects the size of Mars. Size don't matter as they are still transneptunian objects, part of the Kuiper Belt.
But you say "Xena has a moon". So what ? Even asteroids can have moons. No big deal.
So the true question is "Is Pluto still a planet ?".
A lot can be said, but I'd say Xena and other transneptunian objects aren't planets while Pluto is.
Why Pluto ? Only because from an historical and cultural point of view, it's a planet.
Gee, can these name choosers at least give a minimum of coolness? Huge continent-sized lumps of rock in space should at least have some weighty, dignified name. I mean, think of what we would be doing in the future. Will people ever be able say 'Invaders from planet Buffy' with a straight face?
And what if we find life? I'd assume the inhabitants of a planet named after characters in a TV show can be quite offended. I propose we go back to good old fashioned Gods and Goddesses.
I think the scientists could have auctioned off the names of the new objects to pay for further space exploration, better telescopes, etc.
Here's an example: a species named after goldenpalace.com (an online casino):
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7493711/
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_
Come on, don't any of these guys read Douglas Adams books? At least one of these objects has to be named Rupert!
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
"The International Astronomical Union, a group of scientists responsible for naming planets, is deciding on formal names for Xena and Gabrielle.". They make it sound like it is a common occurance.... If I were in the group, I would be extatic to finally be able to do something like naming a planet if I had the right too (since it has never needed to be done).
In undeveloped countries, the consumer controls the market. In capitalist America, the market controls you.
Oh shit!
...but since it has been so engraved into our brains and culture, it would be difficult to convince Joe Everyman that it isn't. Still, we should probably rework and specify the definition of planet such that had Pluto been discovered today, it would not be classified as such.
Am I to assume from the naming that the new planets having nothing more going for them than huge ... tracts of land?
Name the new planet Windows and its moon Linux.
You call it a moon.
... I for one welcome out longlegged female planetless overlords.
Lonely?
insecurity asks the wrong question irritation gives the wrong answer
Since this is nothing but a rock, pretending to be a planet and it has a very minor follower, I can think of a new name: BushWhacker and name the moon, Rover. Of course, rename the kupier belt "dumbs field".
Release him!
so what do you call a moon with no planet?
Endor.
Mark: Hey, see that moon? No that one there.
Dave and Bruce: Ahh.
Mark: I think that moon is a bit of a spy. Yes I do. There was a moon like that on the summer of my sixteenth year. Some say I was sixteen but [sigh] I don't know. And there was a girl, too; her name was Marie. At night together we would walk down by the sea and oh my god if you could see the body on this woman. The way at night her long legs would stick into the moist night sand like gods own barge poles, you know. And I longed to tell her the feeling I had in my heart for her but the words would not come, they would not come through my spotty adolescent face, they would not come through my angry hair or my sweaty feet or any other part on this body that I know call a man. So the words je t'aime were never passed between us but the moon, yes, that moon spied on us.
[He takes a drink of wine then passes the bottle to Bruce]
Bruce: The moon is bright over Lebanon tonight! The Lebanese moon looks down shim! sham! shikam!!! Cattle Explodes! Cow shrapnel drips off a tree cascades into a mothers tear. Poor little boy who goes into battle and comes back dead or worse comes back a man. Why don't you warn them moon? Why don't you say duck or scram? But the moon will not. The moon just sits there grinning like a corpse at a Dean Martin roast. What are you laughing at moon? Why don't you share it with the whole class moon? The moon laughs knowingly, the moon laughs, the moon, the.
[He takes a drink of wine and passes the bottle to Dave]
[Dave looks nervous]
Dave: Gee , I wonder who owns that moon?
[Dave sighs disappointedly]
Mark and Bruce: Yes...yes...yes...yes.
Anyway, this was already announced a while back. The story about the moon has been on the linked webpage since at least the last Slashdot story.
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/ second_moon_991029.html mentions a second moon around Earth. Now: if Earth is capable of having two satellites VERY different in size and orbit, and yet they're both called moons, should for all clarity the word 'moon' not be abandoned and replaced by satellite? And call our major moon... well.. 'Moon'?
Just my two euro-cents.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.
Honestly, can we get a name that doesn't reek of pop culture? But then again, why not I guess. It's either name it after a long string of numbers, some obscure historical diety or a show about lesbian dominatrix warrior women in leather. Hmmm, I guess that's not such a tough choice after all. That, and I just wanted to use "lesbian dominatrix warrior women" in a sentance.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
Did they hire the guys from the Mars naming program to figure this one out?
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/2 5/0647254&tid=226
This is all stupid, and it all falls out of our need to categorize everything, usually on the wrong criteria.
So, you have stars, and they're easy to identify because there's this whole fusion reaction that gives off a lot of radiated energy. Everything that is too small to start the reaction is just in a different category - "not a star".
Falling into the "not a star" category within our solar system, all of the observed objects have parameters that are continuous variables, not categorical. Earth and Mars are more similar than Earth and Jupiter, but they're not the same, and neither can we put them in the same category.
So, stop calling them planets... just call them objects. Earth is a satellite of the sun. The moon is a satellite of Earth. Planet is a pointless definition anyway, based on how humans started discovering the universe, rather than what we now have as a model.
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
And a lot of us really didn't like "Mostly Harmless". Even Adams admits it was a bleak book due to some problems in his life, and wanted to write a more upbeat sixth book, but he didn't get the chance.
I find your ideas intriguing, and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
Pluto wasn't discovered very long ago, these guys probably had a hand in naming it.
That's an easy one. It's even so old I doubt it is in syndication anymore. It's Space 1999 . Anyone else remember those staple guns they used for weapons?
OK, I am going to sue whomever is responsible for this discovery. They are messing with my horoscope and now my fate will be influenced by Xena.
I better hurry too before some Russian lady beats me to it.
Aww c'mon! It's bad enought that my old planets mneumonic has become useless currency in the last few months, now they're making it impossible to come up with a new one.
ôó
Why not name it after the one who saw it first
There's a moon in the sky
It's called the moon
And everybody is there, including,
Saturn, Mercury
Saturn, Venus
Saturn, Mars
Saturn, Jupiter
The Van Allen Belt
A contributor to Wikipedia, by the way, has amusingly recognised this and posted the following definition (and no, it wasn't me, my Latin is not nearly good enough)
Satelles dicitur corpus caeleste naturale quod circum planetam vel asteroidam revolvitur et ipsum non lucet
(S?)he defines it as a natural body which revolves around a planet or an asteroid. I disagree with the "natural", but at least I'm not alone in the world on this!
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
"Hiya. It's a bit lonely up here. I've got a lot of space. Yeah space. Space."
The Moon, Mighty Boosh [Series 2]
Taradise.
Flout 'em and scout 'em,
and scout 'em and flout 'em;
Thought is free. - Shakespeare [The Tempest]
If this thing was discovered closer to home, people would be a lot more excited rather than crack wise with a bunch of weak jokes.
Human nature, eh?
-FL
So, stop calling them planets... just call them objects. Earth is a satellite of the sun. The moon is a satellite of Earth.
... and so on ...
... scientists suddenly decide don't want them! WTF. Correct the mistake that was Pluto, or create an 'Icy Planet' category and have loads more planets, and decide what to do about Ceres.
If they are objects (which they are), then we can subclass them and give them more solid definitions...
public class CelestialBody {...}
public class Star extends CelestialBody {...}
public class Satellite implements Orbits {...}
public class Planet extends Satellite
public class RockyPlanet extends Planet {...}
public class GasPlanet extends Planet {...}
public class IcePlanet extents Planet {...}
public class Moon extends Satellite {...}
(of course now we'd use generics and shit)
The real issue with the terminology is that scientific terminology is being influenced by short-lived cultural terminology. This is clearly a rather retarded idea in the long run. Many people here agree on a terminology for a planet that might mean there are over 20 planets in the solar system, or 9 non-ice planets (+Ceres, -Pluto). Most things we learn in life aren't correct, so there isn't any harm in letting popular culture take the 30 years or so to catch up with the truth, but we'd better not fuck around with the truth now because of popular culture.
Loads of us have grown up expecting Planet X at any point, and now we have X, XI, XII,
Two arse cheeks.
"so what do you call a moon with no planet?"
I would call Xena a planot.
And Gabrielle is thus not a moon, so, I don't know... moot ?
Do people never think about why the flimsy pieces of metal flying about above us are called what they are?
Um, should they? It may not be as obvious to everyone as it apparently is to you.
Michael Brown, one of the scientists on the team that discovered the planet and now its moon, has an excellent website about 2003UB313 and has been keeping it current. I've been checking it out to see if there are any interesting developments about the team that apparently claimed the discovery of 2003UB313 without mentioning the fact that they at least visited the logs of the telescope Brown's team was using, if not outright deducing its existence from those logs. It's great to see this kind of rapid dissemination from the principals. By the way, he also has an extensive website about his newborn daughter's sleep patterns which is pretty impressive too...
It's psychosomatic. You need a lobotomy. I'll get a saw.
IMHO, since we are having such a debate as what is a planet and what is not, then the notion of a planet has outlived its usefulness. Out of all of the large rocks orbiting the sun, why select some to be called planets and others not? Is there a need to draw such a distinction? Labelling some objects as planets and others as not is as ridiculous as deciding upon "x" meters of string to be known as a standard long or short piece.
If you say we need "planets" so that objects may be easily classified, then I sat that the application of the data determines the measurement for classification. And there are countless measures such as size, mass, distance from the sun, eccentricity, angle from the ecliptic, or any combination of these and more.
The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than the question of whether a submarine can swim.
"The discovery team also have nicknamed the planet 'Xena' and the moon 'Gabrielle'." Wow....any bets on the discovery team being nothing but virgins?
Ida And Dactyl
Ida Is an Asteroid. Dactyl is another asteroid which is a moon of Ida. I dont see anyone calling Ida a planet just because it has a moon.
All misspellings and grammatical errors in the above post are intentional and part of my artistic expression.
If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
If Tesla had thought smarter, books about him wouldn't mostly be on the remainder table at Barnes & Noble. It wouldn't mostly be crackpot websites championing his place in history.
resigned
The problem here is not one of underclassification, its one of overclassification. We are classifying things to a level beyond which our theories are solid enough to prove. Thus, as we discover and understand more, we face the problem of having wrongly taught generations of people who now protect what they "know" because, after all, they never teach anything wrong in school.
Unless they can come up with a concise definition that doesn't sound like someone is simply trying to justify their historical bias, perhaps we should just solve this by dropping the word "planet". We could just make everything a satellite and perhaps go the one step further of including the largest body it orbits. So, all of the planets become solar satellites and our moon becomes a mere Earth satellite.
I thought they had already found the "10th" planet. Wasn't it called Sedna? And what ever happened to that other object that had a moon they found called EL61? Here is a reference to the story: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8756128/
Someting bigger than a toaster with a non-artificial moon.
Help end the use of Sigs. Tomorrow
Were I Dave Matthews I'd have to go with Satellite. Too bad the damn song is so hard to play.
Everybody sing now...
"She is the one named sailor...
Sailor Venus,
Sailor Mercury,
Sailor Mars,
Sailor Jupiter,
??Sailor Xena??" Didn't she already star in something?? Oh well!
If it comes to that, the true question may be "Are Earth and Jupiter both planets?"
There is historical precedent for deciding something that was considered a planet not to be one. The asteroid Ceres was considered a Planet for about fifty years, until it became obvious that it was merely the largest member of a numerous class of smaller bodies. So, it might well be that we will end up with the period from 1930 to the present being another such period, and Pluto merely considered one of the largest/nearest of whatever they call the Trans-Neptunian Objects. (I suspect they won't keep that name, if only because Pluto occasisonally nudges a bit closer than Neptune.)
But while we're reconsidering the classification of planets, a more general look at the solar system might be in order... which leaves some uncomfortable other facts. Leaving Pluto to its TNO status, and even leaving the Asteroid category to its prior doom, the remaining planets fall into two groups: the rocks (Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars) and clouds (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune). And to make matters worse, Jupiter and Saturn each have a moon (Ganymede and Titan) larger than Mercury, and similar in geologic(?) composition to the inner rocks. It may be that some of Jupiter's moons should be put into the same conceptual category as the inner rocks while we're doing one of these renamings.
Perhaps only one of the two groups ought "rightly" be called planets, and the other given a new name. Or perhaps the two planet categories should be given distinct names (rocks and clouds), and a notation made that some rocks orbit clouds. Perhaps some reconsideration should be given as to whether all asteroids should be in the asteroid category, while we're redrawing dividing lines — Ceres is a respectable paperweight. Perhaps the Earth-Moon system will end up recognized as a double rock-planet system, or only end as a rock-planet with a bigass asteroid orbiting it. Or perhaps I should shut up and let the astronomers think about this for another Uranian year. =)
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
The discovery team also have nicknamed the planet 'Xena' and the moon 'Gabrielle'.
Wait a sec. The planet and moon are lesbians?
The usual solution suggested is that we need to make a up new word to describe this different class of objects--something that communicates that they are sort of planet-like, but not quite.
For instance, we have the word "planetoid" already--it describes pretty small chunks of rock that orbit the sun, like planets, but MUCH smaller.
So, in honor of hipsters and slackers everywhere, my suggestion for these objects, smaller than planets but larger than planetoids, is PLANETSTER.
If we can have Napster, Grokster, Aimster, Madster, Blubster, Blogster, Friendster, etc etc etc, then why not PLANETSTER, too?
so what do you call a moon with no planet?
OK, should be obvious by now--MOONSTER.
Umm... I'm not. I think you've another rock to turn over. These folks are talking about the discovery of a candidate for TENTH planet. 5+4+2=11... or are you counting Earth-Luna as a double planet system?
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
Challenger and Columbia
I shall call him... *pinky to corner of mouth* Mini-Moon!
Skype is too convoluted... Now I'm reverse-engineering the Kyoto Protocol.
That's no moon, it's a, a... ship! A... Deathstar!
Either that or the Borg are coming to take us away, ha! ha!
I think it is really cool that there are still a few things in science that are un settled despite what we consider to be our vast knowledge and infinite wisdom. I mean we obviosly know all about this whole creation thing, I learned all about it in school.
On the first day Spock created the heavens and the Earth, and a guy named Han Solo to sail among them in the Enterprise on a five year mission of avoiding the Hutts.
I think that any object that is relatively round and large enough to have the gravitiational pull to capture another noticable object, and in a reasonably stable mostly cicular orbit should be considered a planet, but that is my own personal opinion.
Jeffy
Like arts? Like cheesy little Indie mags? Check out www.artwerkmag.com, and don't laugh at the bad coding please.
Point is: the word 'moon' should be abandoned, or only applied to Earth. 'Satellite' is sufficient for the other major orbital things.
Thát's what I meant to say.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.
How many tenth planets does our system have? I thought that in 2003, it was already named Sedna. (http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/sedna/)
They can't BOTH be the tenth planet, can they?
so what do you call a moon with no planet?
Moon Unit?
The Earth's moon formed in a similar way when Earth crashed into an object the size of Mars.
An "object" the size of Mars is properly termed a "planet". JFC, do we have to wait for the International Astronomical Union to scratch our own asses? Fuck them. Nobody needed them to classify Mars a planet.
A moon without a planet involved is also known as indecent exposure in most legal jurisdictions.
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
"Many scientists are objecting to whether the new planet really is a new planet" when they should really be objecting to the fact that this 10th planet is named after a bad fantasy TV show!
Big apple, new Yorik, undig it, something's unrotting in Edenmark.
There's this persistent idea that you can't do science(and even communication in general) unless everything is frozen into precise definitions. Sure you can.
You use the word 'planet' when its meaning is clear in the context of a specific communication. In other instances when the word generates confusion, you avoid the word and use another one. If on occasion more clarification is needed, you add clarification. Usage doesn't even have to be consistent. If you start from the idea that planets are big, what's the problem if scientists declare they found a "tiny planet". Who wants to know if a 50 foot chair is still a chair? It's clear enough.
Sure, you can always claim we're already in the confusion zone and the word does need extra refinement - or since upgrading the formal definition rarely reduces confusion, the word has to be dumped. It happens, but not here, not yet. The big problem is that people don't understand language. (heh heh)
In practice, you're going to end up writing schoolbooks. And in those books there will be the sentence "Our sun has X planets.", and you have to make a decision about X because you can't leave that space empty. Really, this sentence indicates you started off on the wrong foot. Who of us didn't think at some early stage that space around the sun was nice clean and empty, except for some planets and their moons?
You get a better representation of the situation if you modify that sentence in such a way that X doesn't matter that much anymore.
Amongst the rubble out there orbiting the sun, there are about ten big balls that stand out enough from their surroundings to call them planets, although some astronomers think that only eight of those objects are worthy of the grandiose title of 'Planet' and the other two are too small and boring.
what do you call a moon with no planet?
... Kato Kaelin?
Um
I guess if we're sticking to the Xena them, then Joxer would be my answer.
All I can say is they must share a damn interesting orbit, if all that fanfiction is to be believed...
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
I am aware. You miss part of my point: what are Titan and Ganymede? Currently, they're each considered just another moon; however, I suspect they might be more accurately considered in what is currently the "terrestrial planets" category, aside from the inconvenient detail of, er... not being planets. Which is why I suspect the nomenclature should be addressed: "Terrestrial Planets" may be a misnomer, if some of the items that are best fit into the category aren't planets. "Gas Giants"... well, metallic hydrogen aside, can't really argue much with that. =)
"Gas Giants" and "Terrestrials" would suit me fine, although you'd want to add asteroids and TNO's as additional categories. Distinguish between Satellites and Primaries as a separate consideration. There is the question of where the cutoff would be between Terrestrial-types and asteroid-types would lie (Which category does Luna fall in? How about Ceres?), but that may be a more useful scientific debate. The distinction between comets, asteroids, and TNOs also gets to be usefully interesting. But I think the term "Planet" might soon be obsolete.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.