Slashdot Mirror
Is Pluto a Binary Planet?
astroengine writes "If the Pluto-Charon system were viewed in a similar way to binary stars and binary asteroids, Pluto would become a Pluto-Charon binary planet. After all, Charon is 12% the mass of Pluto, causing the duo to orbit a barycenter that is located above Pluto's surface. Sadly, in the IAU's haste to define what a planet is in 2006, they missed a golden opportunity to define the planetary binary. Interestingly, if Pluto was a binary planet, last week's discovery of a fifth Plutonian moon would have in fact been the binary's fourth moon to be discovered by Hubble — under the binary definition, Charon wouldn't be classified as a moon at all."
The Death Star was so massive that when it orbited a planet it became a binary system.
I eat only the real part of complex carbohydrates.
Most do not view holy books as literal truth like religious fundamentalists, but rather guidelines and proverbs on the meaning behind life and how to live it well. Nor do they believe in creationism and other pseudoscience. But there are a large number of chemists, biologists, virologists, toxicologists, medical doctors, etc. that go to church, temple, mosque, etc.
At least with Christianity, the Bible is the literal word of God. There is no sect (that I'm aware of) that does not claim the Bible is the literal word of God. If the book is the literal word of God (and God is infallible), then you have to accept everything in the book as the truth of God's word.
Problem is, claiming that some things in the Bible aren't really true, or are things that you don't believe in (for instance, the Bible condones slavery, and tells you how many slaves you are allowed to own) either requires some mind bending logic (God is infallible, God wrote the bible, the bible says you can own slaves, yet I don't believe what the Bible, even though the Bible is infallible by definition), or just flat out ignorance of your own religion.
If you want to pick and choose ideas based on morality, why tie yourself to a particular dogma, especially one that is contradictory, to say the least. If you're a scientist, you have to be well versed in the ideas of evidence, using logic to form arguments, creating testable theories and using evidence to prove and disprove them. Yet in order to believe in a God, you're required to give up the idea of using logic or evidence to form your beliefs. You're believing something because a book and a bunch of men in robes told you to (except the parts you don't like, because slavery and treating women as property is wrong, even though everything in there is the infallible word of your God and must be true according to your own belief system).
You are very wrong. Almost no sects of Christianity believes that the bible is the literal truth and the word of God.
The Pope, even, have stated that at least Genesis is allegory.
There are even more moderate sects, like the state church of Denmark. Where there are priests who don't believe in God.
Here's a quote from the priest Thorkild Grosbøll: "God belongs in the past. He is actually so old fashioned that I am baffled by modern people believing in his existence. I am thoroughly fed up with empty words about miracles and eternal life."