IAU Rules Pluto Still a Planet

scottyscout writes "NPR reports that Pluto has dodged a bullet. An international panel has unanimously recommended that Pluto retain its title as a planet, and it may be joined by other undersized objects that revolve around the sun. Some astronomers had lobbied for reclassifying Pluto as its so tiny. And at least one major museum has excluded Pluto from its planetary display. But sources tell NPR that under the proposal, to be presented at a big meeting of astronomers in Prague next week for a vote, Pluto would become part of a new class of small planets and several more objects could be granted membership."

Comments

Re:If they have such power,,,

[mrxak]

People will debate Pluto's class until the end of the solar system. This is not a new story, in the sense that this is not the first time Pluto's status has been discussed. I think it should just be grandfathered in, if anything. Plus we have a bunch of other objects out there that could be considered planets too. Sedna, Xena, Quaoar, Varuna, Ixion... what do we do with those?

Inaccurate

[Zenaku]

The headline and summary are extremely misleading. The agency hasn't ruled at all. The vote is yet to come. All that has happened is that a panel of 7 people has made a recommendation, which may or may not be excepted. And the recommendation has plenty of problems that might prevent it from passing a vote. From TFA:

The panel's recommendation is being reviewed by the International Astronomical Union's executive committee. In an interview last week, executive committee member Bob Williams said the definition proposed by the panel had some potential problems, and he was not at all sure if the astronomers voting in Prague this month would approve it.

"At this point, I don't feel confident enough to bet in favor of it," he said.

Re:More than just tiny

[Anonymous Coward]

Pluto has a highly elliptical, out-of-plane orbit that crosses over Neptune's orbit, AND its orbit is 3/2 in phase with Neptune, suggesting that it was captured by Neptune's gravity.

Not quite, Pluto actually formed in the original Kuiper Belt, making it part of the original Solar System, not an object captured by Neptune. Its current orbit is the result of Neptune's gravity, yes, but Pluto was formed in orbit of the sun.

Is a "planet" something that was created with the solar system, or is a "planet" simply something that has a moon? Right now, we're using the latter definition.

Actually, neither Mercury nor Venus have moons, yet they're accepted as planets. The problem is not that an "incorrect" definition of planet is being used, it's that there is no clear definition of what constitutes a planet. This recommendation (the title is misleading, as no actual ruling was handed down) is merely part of a much larger debate on the definition of a planet.