Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Geologists Angry About New 'Pluton' Definition

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the what's-in-a-name dept.

An anonymous reader writes "According to a story over at Nature, some geologists are ticked off at the International Astronomical Union for using the word 'pluton' to describe a round object orbiting the sun with a period more than 200 years. A pluton, it seems, is a common type of rock formation that exists in most Geology 101 curricula. IAU head Owen Gingerich is quoted as saying that he was only peripherally aware of the definition, and because it didn't show up on MS Word's spell check, he didn't think it was that important."

15 of 390 comments (clear)

  1. Wow, that's an interesting take... by snowgirl · · Score: 5, Funny

    IAU head Owen Gingerich is quoted as saying that he was only peripherally aware of the definition, and because it didn't show up on MS Word's spell check, he didn't think it was that important.

    In other news, the US Congress voted not to move to Linux, after Senator Binghaman discovered that MS Word's spell checker doesn't recognize it.

    --
    WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    1. Re:Wow, that's an interesting take... by letxa2000 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      It's silly anyway. If something else in Geology were to be called a Pluton I can understand why there could be confusion. But if a Geologist says, "Take a look at that pluton over there", there's a very low probability that people will think he's talking about an astronomical object with an orbital period of more than 200 years. Likewise, if an astronomer references a pluton, there's a small probability he's talking about a rock formation.


      So why in the world are geologists upset? Just been awhile since they had a rumble with astronomers, or...?

    2. Re:Wow, that's an interesting take... by Static11 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Angstrom, Joule, Candella.

      They don't have "significant meaning in popular culture" either, but you would not go around redefining those words, would you?

      Only in everyone's favourite 'most important' country, would Joule be classified as not having significant meaning in poular culture. Travel to the outside world, where people use decimal measurement systems, and you'll see kilojoules in the nutritional information of everything in your supermarket.

  2. obvious solution by casehardened · · Score: 5, Funny

    Today, the UFC brings you: Scientist Cage Match! My money's on the geologists. Despite their tendencies towards excessive beer consumption, at least they run around outdoors occasionally.

  3. Suggested replacements... by Russ+Steffen · · Score: 5, Funny

    Plutrino
    Plutonite
    Mini-Pluto
    iPluto Nano

    1. Re:Suggested replacements... by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 5, Funny

      pluton27 pluton234 pluton342 pluton542 pluton654 pluton8234

      --
      Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  4. Context by talkingpaperclip · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Context should be sufficient to tell what kind of 'pluton' is being discussed. It's not like plutons pluton through the atmosphere and become plutons all the time.

    Seriously though, the word 'nucleus' has several different definitions in different branches of science, and I've never had problems with it.

  5. Perhaps next time by x3nos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    because it didn't show up on MS Word's spell check, he didn't think it was that important.

    Well next time, maybe the IAU should check Wikipedia just to be sure. There is some really good info there. . .

    Way to go Owen.

    --
    /* somewhat functional - fix later */
    1. Re:Perhaps next time by Tatarize · · Score: 5, Funny

      Maybe the geologists shouldn't name shit associated with Roman Gods. The damned astronomers called dibs years ago!

      --

      It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.
  6. Not a moot point by mattr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Skipping for the moment implications of inadequacy on the part of both MS and this scientist, clearly there is a problem when people base their work on expectations of intellectual integrity on the part of corporate IT products like this, especially those not easily accessible by reviewers. There is a Japanese character dictionary built into Windows too but I have no idea how a reviewer could grade it against commonly used print versions.

    Besides, geology seems to be one of the most highly leveraged sciences in planetary studies, if you consider most of what the Mars robots were doing was geology. For a planetary scientists to miss this is bizarre.

  7. Re:say what now? by kfg · · Score: 5, Funny

    . . . does it actually merit a new word?

    Yes, yes it does. Precision of technical terms is always desirable, so the trick is to find one that no one else is already using.

    I suggest we look for some distinctive feature of Pluto and form the new word around that. Lesseeeeeee, it' been variously suggested that it's either an ex-moon of Neptune, or an ex-Kuiper belt object, so I suggest:

    Exxon.

    That one should be safe. I can' imagine anyone else wanting such an obviosly made up; and utterly stupid, word.

    KFG

  8. Re:BFD. That's what those numbers are for... by Tatarize · · Score: 5, Funny

    It still will cause problems.

    Because of their distance from the Sun (and lack of magma), plutons typically lack plutons. So a pluton such as Pluto and its pluton Charon, would both likely be devoid of any plutons.

    --

    It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.
  9. You mean? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    joule: (n) a gemstone, such as amber, from which energy can be generated

    candella: (n) a scented candle, usually used to illuminate bubble baths

    angstrom: (n) a digital write-once medium for storing memories of fear and anxiety

  10. Missing the forest through the trees by frdmfghtr · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I think a very important point is being missed here...

    Owen Gingerich, an astronomer at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and chair of the IAU committee that created the definition, says that they were aware of its usage amongst geologists, but unaware of its importance to the field. "Since the term is not in the MS Word or the WordPerfect spell checkers, we thought it was not that common," Gingerich wrote in an e-mail to news@nature.com. The geologic definition of the word does appear in common dictionaries, including the Oxford English.


    Gingerich is head of the IAU. He's supposed to be pretty damned smart.

    He used a word processor SPELL CHECK dictionary as the authority to determine the existence of a scientific/technical term.

    A SPELL CHECK dictionary. Used as the authority to determine the exisatence of a scientific term.

    The head of the International Astronomic Union. Spell check dictionary. Existence of a scientific term.

    Is anybody home??

    He may as well have done no research into the background of the term. He would have looked less stupid that way. Sloppy and careless maybe, but not stupid.

    And how is it he got to this position and how long will he be allowed to remain? Maybe he was elected so he wouldn't hurt himself running with scissors.
    --
    Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
  11. Re:I'm sort of embarrased by lxs · · Score: 5, Funny

    As a burglar, I'm furious of geology's use of the word "intrusion".

    For what it's worth, as a mathematician, I'm furious at the use of the word "matrix" by geologists, "integration" by sociologists, "differentiation" by biologists, the use of the word "domain" by web users, and the use of the verb "to commute" by ordinary people stuck in traffic.

    Then again, I'd better watch out for those geologists, they walk around with pointy hammers in their pocket.