Perhaps this was addressed in an earlier post, but I think they are trying to build an all-encompassing definition. If they continue to build additions and corrolaries onto the definiton of the word "Planet" it will become ever more ill-fitting to any of the various objects they are decribing.
What is really needed are more words to describe them. Perhaps something as simple as working a little genus/species into the cataloging system would help to clear up the confusion and give a working definition, e.g. Just as all Primates are not humans, all planets do not (as we now know) revolve around a star...and if calling planets roaming planets or orbiting planets to clear up their state of being, well all the better for us.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps this was addressed in an earlier post, but I think they are trying to build an all-encompassing definition. If they continue to build additions and corrolaries onto the definiton of the word "Planet" it will become ever more ill-fitting to any of the various objects they are decribing. What is really needed are more words to describe them. Perhaps something as simple as working a little genus/species into the cataloging system would help to clear up the confusion and give a working definition, e.g. Just as all Primates are not humans, all planets do not (as we now know) revolve around a star...and if calling planets roaming planets or orbiting planets to clear up their state of being, well all the better for us.