Slashdot Mirror
Dwarf Planets Accumulate In Outer Solar System
An anonymous reader tips a piece in Australian Geographic indicating that Pluto may be in for another demotion, as researchers work to define dwarf planets more exactly. "[Australian researchers] now argue that the radius which defines a dwarf planet should instead be from 200–300 km, depending on whether the object is made of ice or rock. They base their smaller radius on the limit at which objects naturally form a spherical rather than potato-like shape because of 'self-gravity.' Icy objects less than 200 km (or rocky objects less than 300 km) across are likely to be potato shapes, while objects larger than this are spherical. ... They call this limit the 'potato radius' ... [One researcher is quoted] 'I have no problem with there being hundreds of dwarf planets eventually.'"
The preferred term is size-challenged planets.
Planets were in the past, for example, emissaries of the gods. The Moon was considered a quite distinct body. Epicycles and heavenly sphere have also went away.
One that hath name thou can not otter
And is forming a gang. We could be in big trouble here.
Snowy cold and the several dwarfs.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Why is Pluto in for another demotion? It still fits the proposed Dwarf Planet description, right?
I knew where the Planet of the Apes was, but I had no idea where the Planet of the Dwarfs was.
Thanks!
"History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
Plutoids ain't got no reason to live.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
This is just totally fucking unfair. Leave Pluto alone!!!!!
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Fuck you Pluto.
Yeah, you.
Dwarrrrrrffffffffffffffffffffffffffff!
That's what your mom's butt looked like after I put my Plutoid in it.
Just name them potato planets.
I for one couldn't care less what category Pluto falls under. Planet, Dwarf Planet, Pototoid, Potato Chip. Who cares. I have no emotional attachment.
What I do care about is bad science and bad classification. The current definition stinks. The problems I have
1. A 'dwarf planet' is not a subclass of 'planet' as one would expect from the name. It should have been named something different.
2. The definitions refers to our the sun. Not the star which the planet orbits but 'the sun'. That makes it sound like extrasolar planets are not planets either.
3. The definition of planet requires that the body has cleared it's orbit. So while it is forming early in the solar system it is not a planet then one day "poof" by magic we have a planet.
4. The draft proposal was nothing like the final proposal. The definition was passed on the last day of that IAU conference when lots of scientists had already gone. That suggests a political pissing match rather than well thought out science.
5. The definition is not consistent with what had been taught for decades, and there was no good reason for that.
I have an Astronomy degree that I did for fun and that I have never used professionally. I lost all respect for the IAU on the day they released their crappy definition.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
TFA says nothing about re-classifying Pluto out of the "dwarf planet" category. In fact there is no FA, only a picture. And it's quite obvious from that picture that Pluto far exceeds the 300 km radius that is the proposed threshold.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
I though Sailor Chibi-Moon aka. (the even more annoying sawed off munchkin version of Sailor Moon) was bad enough.
Now we are going to Have all of these Dwarf Planets represented by hundreds of annoying sawed off Sailor Scouts. Plus their names will be damned confusing. Names like: "Sailor (55565) 2002 AW", Sailor Makemake, Sailor "(84522) 2002 TC302", Sailor 50000 Quaoar. I mean what the hell is their Transomation scene going to sound like? Sailor Makemake Make-up.... That just sounds completely retarded.
Damn the dwarf planets, the sooner we can blow them all up the sooner anime will be safe again...
Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
Dibs on the band name "Potato Radius".
Saying your "phone ran out of batteries" is like saying your "car ran out of gas tanks".
Dwarf Planets Accumulate In Outer Solar System
"Heigh-ho, heigh-ho..."
Seeing bad movies only encourages them. Watch responsibly
Your Plutoid? Is it like a penis only smaller?
I wished he'd take up on auto-batmasphyxia, auto-asphyxiation while wearing a batman outfit.
Dwarf Planets Accumulate??
What, is our solar system some sort of drive-by dumping ground for other stars' litter?
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Not Bush
What then we have to determine percentages of rock and ice? It'd be far simpler to say "Planets" then gives three classes. The obvious classes are Gas Giants, Rocky Planets, and Ice Planets. Why won't there be confusion between Rocky and Ice? Rocky planets in our system seem to have a small percentage of water whether ice or liquid. We only seem to have four rocky planets the real debate is over smaller planets that have a high percentage of ice. There are other rocky objects but they seem to fit the "Potato" definition so wouldn't be planets just large asteroids. Orbiting the sun would be another factor of coarse. I realize we get into shape of orbit but that's another silly hair splitting contest since no planet as a truly circular orbit. End of problem and no more splitting hairs and demoting planets due to semantics.
How science defines things is not always the same as how the ''common man'' calls things. For instance: botanically a tomato is a fruit, most of my friends think of it as a vegetable; also botanically rhubarb is a vegetable, most of my friends think of it as fruit.
To most people, myself included, pluto will remain a planet - I don't care what the astronomers think!
Can I borrow your batman suit when you're done choking yourself out?
First, this isn't a call to standardize either the SI system or the metric system globally.
Anyone else notice that the image in TFA has everything in miles, but then the little information in the actual article was always in kilometers? Also, while the article mentions radius, they never specify that's what the image is showing, nor do they state the radius of any of the things in the image, so, without outside research, you couldn't tell where Pluto falls in their discussion for certain, even if you're adept at converting miles to kilometers!
after all, we've got "Uranus". Since the jokes aint gonna stop, let's just go with the theme and see where it takes us.
Table-ized A.I.
...of dwarf planets."
Well, neither do I. Noodles are fine for dinner, too.
That in and as of itself does not count very much unless said researcher is shown to be a leader of opinion and/or part of a larger consensus. I don't claim to know either way, simply wanted to point that out.
Adding more dwarf planets is in no way another demotion for Pluto. The reason is that in spite of the controversial IAU decision, dwarf planets are planets too. Dr. Alan Stern, who coined the term, intended it to refer to a subclass of planets large enough to be in hydrostatic equilibrium (pulled into a round shape by their own gravity) but not large enough to gravitationally dominate their orbits. He never intended dwarf planets to be designated as not planets at all. And he said he anticipates there being hundreds of these small planets in our solar system.
Only four percent of the IAU voted on this, and most are not planetary scientists. Their decision was immediately opposed in a formal petition by hundreds of professional astronomers led by Dr. Alan Stern, Principal Investigator of NASA’s New Horizons mission to Pluto. Stern and like-minded scientists favor a broader planet definition that includes any non-self-luminous spheroidal body in orbit around a star. The spherical part is important because objects become spherical when they attain a state known as hydrostatic equilibrium, meaning they are large enough for their own gravity to pull them into a round shape. This is a characteristic of planets and not of shapeless asteroids and Kuiper Belt Objects. Pluto meets this criterion and is therefore a planet. Under this definition, our solar system has 13 planets: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Ceres, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto, Haumea, Makemake, and Eris.