IAU Classifies Pluto & Eris As "Plutoids"

Kligat writes "The International Astronomical Union has decided that Pluto and Eris should be classified as "plutoids," alongside their 2006 classification as dwarf planets. Under the definition, the self-gravity of a plutoid is enough for it to achieve a near-spherical shape, but not enough for it to clear its orbit of its rocky neighbors, and the plutoid orbits the Sun beyond Neptune." Reader FiReaNGeL links to a similar story at e! Science News.

Comments

What a pantload

[Savior_on_a_Stick]

How they are classified means what to whom? Someone needs their grant pulled for gross misuse of time.

Other solar systems?

[Steve Max]

*sigh*
The new definition of "planet" was quite good. Clear, straight to the point, and easy to apply to any object. Now, they add a new category that applies only to our solar system?

Okay, we won't be seeing objects this small on other star systems, but the point remains. We are already at a time when we know these objects should exist in many other places in the universe. The classification shouldn't depend on their position inside our solar system, it should be generic enough that we won't have to change it (again) when we see one of those around Alpha Centaurii. I thought this was the single most important thing to come out of the previous discussion about what should be considered a "planet".

Re:Other solar systems?

[Jugalator]

As ridiculous it may seem, I'm pretty sure that this celestial body class was invented in some sort of weird attempt to satisfy people that didn't want Pluto to lose its planetary status.

"Now, it's at least a plutoid. Happy?"

Yes, from a scientific POV, it's pure bullshit, of course.

Let me summarize

[Bryansix]

They didn't do any more research. Nothing scientific was done. No more information was found out or cataloged. Nothing interesting happened. Just a bunch of people with too much time on their hands gave yet another name to a celestial body that orbits the sun. Frankly, who cares?

Re:Calimero

[vajaradakini]

No, definitions of planets are important if you're looking for them elsewhere and wish to classify the objects you find orbiting other stars. Besides, even as a first year astronomy student five years ago I knew Pluto wasn't a planet, they only made it official recently (and properly defined planets).

This plutoid business is silly though and only serves as some sort of consolation prize to the people who still wish that planets weren't actually defined and Pluto could still be considered among them. I mean, unless we're actually going to be applying this standard to objects we find around other stars (which I think would be silly, but then I'm not a planetary astronomer... so who knows).

I suspect that this has something to do with the upcoming international year of astronomy, which is all about getting the public excited about astronomy, semi-reversing Pluto's demotion (which appears to have been unpopular among non-astronomers) seems to be good for this.