It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pluto loses status as a planet

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nerdling
I'm throwing an official strop over this one.

Just think of all the out of date textbooks and confusion this will bring.

hmph.


I like your style! I couldn't agree with you anymore than with such a lightning fast action.




posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 01:48 PM
link   
as an amature astronomer, I cannot for the life of me see why they have taken away plutos planet status.

It has a moon, a regular orbit around the sun, gravity, and an atmosphere. (yes it does, they measured light refraction from occulting stars, and it has a growing atmosphere).

To deny pluto planet status just because its far away and smaller than every thing else appears at first glance lunacy. (No pun intended).

BUT, and heres the but. To have future generations taught of eight planets could be a decieving ploy. I kid you not. Ancient sumerians counted the earth as the &th planet of the solar system. yes the seventh, not the third. That implies a measurment from the outside in, ie travel INTO our solar system is how they counted it.

To only have eight planets would place a thin veneer of doubt on these texts, a doubt and ridicule that will grow over time ...

They are hiding some thing with this, Im just a bit set back as to what.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 01:57 PM
link   
Wow, I just looked at Wikipedia about Planet Xena (2003UB313) and they already updated it saying:



Under a new definition approved on August 24, 2006, 2003 UB313 was designated a "dwarf planet".[2]


Edn

posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by D4rk Kn1ght


To deny pluto planet status just because its far away and smaller than every thing else appears at first glance lunacy. (No pun intended).


So you would agree with haveing 20+ planets? As and amature Astronomer surely you would agree that there needs to be clasifications for what is and what isnt a planet the old system was getting to broad it worked before but with growing technology were discovering more and more objects which could easily be classed as a planet useing the old system. whats so bad about createing a new clasification for smaller spherical bodys which orbit a star? surely its a good thing? if you want to put it in a different light the current 8 planets are major planets and Pluto plus the two other are minor planets. Pluto isnt going to disapear just because its no longer classed as a planet.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 02:41 PM
link   
I always wonder what the point of these sort of deliberations and announcements are, apart from a bunch of old duffers justifying their grants.

I mean, at the end of the day, Pluto is still there and larger and more significant than those who would downgrade it



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 03:20 PM
link   


As an amateur astronomer, I cannot for the life of me see why they have taken away Pluto's planet status.


Why not ? It is nothing more than a large KBO. The only reason that it was called a planet in the first place is because astronomers were looking for one that was "supposedly" perturbing Neptune. In fact, Pluto's discovery was no more than a mixture of one man's dedication and determination, and pure blind luck !

Over the years, the size of Pluto was downgraded further and further as more accurate information was obtained. This cast doubt on its status as a planet, and many astronomers suspected that it was nothing more than the brightest member of an "outer asteroid belt". The discovery of Charon didn't help matters, since this relatively large moon temporarily strengthened its claim to planetary status.

However, the discovery of 1992QB1 was the beginning of the end for Pluto. As more and more KBOs were detected, it was abundantly clear that it was a far better fit for this class of objects than the major planets.

Stripping Pluto of its planet designation was the only sensible option.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 03:37 PM
link   
I guess there is already a petition circulating around to overturn the decision.... so it's a wait and see thing.

I hope ultimately it's decided in the scientific community with factors such as the general public and culture having little say. I feel this makes much more sense.





posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 03:40 PM
link   
Can someone tell me what Pluto is now. If Pluto is not a planet what is it?



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shar
Can someone tell me what Pluto is now. If Pluto is not a planet what is it?

It was said already. A dwarf planet.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:07 PM
link   
I don't care what those imbeciles at the IAU and that relative of Dan Brown, Mike Brown has to say.

Pluto will always be considered a planet in the true guideline of scientific understandings within the philosophy and faith of Draneism. A faith not hindered by pure idiocy...

And I think this shows that we all a new means of providing legal transactions to canoning scientific understandings.

I mean there were just around 400 out of 10,000 astronomers at that meeting... were they all aristocrats and possibly religious?

Heck the christian world has now declare the same thing administered by those aristocratic numbskulls. Oh well... you can just join Draneism if still think Pluto should still be a planet.

Draneism is an agnostic faith that allows people to choose their own personal philosophies and ideas.

By the way, this is the most stupidest idea of a planet I have ever heard of in my entire life. "A planet is a celestial body that (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit."

What if it is a planet in a bistellar system, a system with two stars?

And what if it has trojans "small celestial objects" in its orbit that hasn't clear in its "neighbourhood?" Jupiter and Earth anyone?

That definition not only declassifies Pluto as a planet, but the Earth and Jupiter as well.

I mean Neptune also sort of has a Trojan through its orbit, Pluto... since it no longer can be called a Planet. Which means now Neptune is no longer a planet.


Originally posted by Apass

Originally posted by Shar
Can someone tell me what Pluto is now. If Pluto is not a planet what is it?

It was said already. A dwarf planet.


To be quite honest the term Dwarf Planet should stay, just as there should be a term called, "Giant Planet."

The term Giant Planet should associate with Gas Giants or Jovian Planets.

And the term Dwarf Planet should associated with Pluto like objects or Plutinoan Planets.

And there should be a term associating with the medium size of planets which can be called Terrestrial or Standard Planets.

And what might I suggest should a dwarf planet and a planet both be classify together as?

[edit on 24-8-2006 by Timeseer]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Apass

Originally posted by Shar
Can someone tell me what Pluto is now. If Pluto is not a planet what is it?

It was said already. A dwarf planet.


Once again this makes no sense cause their taking it out of text books etc.... so how can they call it a planet of any kind dwarf or anything.... a dwarf planet to me seems to say its still a planet that is not what they are saying. a dwarf star is still a star.

to say its a dwarf planet will be to leave it alone.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shar
Once again this makes no sense cause their taking it out of text books etc.... so how can they call it a planet of any kind dwarf or anything.... a dwarf planet to me seems to say its still a planet that is not what they are saying. a dwarf star is still a star.

to say its a dwarf planet will be to leave it alone.

So where's the problem? It means the Pluto is still a planet. Just like the planets from the inner solar system are rocky planets and from the outer system (without Pluto) are gazeous planets. What's the big deal?



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shar

Originally posted by Apass

Originally posted by Shar
Can someone tell me what Pluto is now. If Pluto is not a planet what is it?

It was said already. A dwarf planet.


Once again this makes no sense cause their taking it out of text books etc.... so how can they call it a planet of any kind dwarf or anything.... a dwarf planet to me seems to say its still a planet that is not what they are saying. a dwarf star is still a star.

to say its a dwarf planet will be to leave it alone.


Did you know that the majority of astronomers at that meeting were Catholics or pertaining to a similar religious identity?

It seems rather strange that the religious communities just instantly agree to what the scientific community says.

And can someone remove Dan Brown from being a planetary scientist, he is making a complete mockery of what is science.

www.msnbc.msn.com...

I don't care if he discovered Xena or Nibiru or whatever... he shouldn't be a scientist. He should be in an asylum where he belongs.

[edit on 24-8-2006 by Timeseer]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:25 PM
link   
This is good. Pluto should have never been a planet, its just another kbo. But i dont understand ehy peaple are so attached to pluto being a planet. Its not like its being destroyed, its still there but labeled different. Its like someone getting upset because some one decided that small donuts are gonna be called donettes



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vegemite
This is good. Pluto should have never been a planet


You should have never opened a science book. Cause you are killing science right now.

What gives you the right to say such ludicrous? Justify it even?


Originally posted by Vegemite
its just another kbo.


Neptune is also a kbo since Pluto as being part of the kbo goes right past the orbit of Neptune.

The Earth, Moon, Mars, and Jupiter lie in the Asteroid Belt... the actual asteroid belt. Not the main asteroid belt that you would confused as being the true asteroid belt. The true asteroid belt is of all the little bodies between the Earth's and Jupiter's orbit.

If Pluto cannot be considered a planet, because it lies in the KB. Then neither should Earth, Mars, and Jupiter, because they lie in the AB. Further Neptune also lies in the KB with Pluto.


Originally posted by Vegemite
But i dont understand ehy peaple are so attached to pluto being a planet.


Because it is a planet? Even if the Idiotic Astronomical Union doesn't say it is.


Originally posted by Vegemite
Its not like its being destroyed, its still there but labeled different.


You are not smart enough to understand this subject. Please reframe from speaking any further.

This isn't a matter of destruction of physical objects. This is about the destruction of science and of the common man.

Let me ask you this at the meeting to discuss what Pluto should be identified as... do you honestly think there were any Middle Class people there? People who make less than a hundred thousand dollars a year.



Originally posted by Vegemite
Its like someone getting upset because some one decided that small donuts are gonna be called donettes


That is not a correct simile... would you care to try again?



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Timeseer
You are not smart enough to understand this subject. Please reframe from speaking any further.

This isn't a matter of destruction of physical objects. This is about the destruction of science and of the common man.

Let me ask you this at the meeting to discuss what Pluto should be identified as... do you honestly think there were any Middle Class people there? People who make less than a hundred thousand dollars a year.


Whoa, dude. You need to cut back on the coffee a little. No way did this person deserve that.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Ok,well it seems no one posted the actual requirements laid out for being classified a planet,so here you go.


Much-maligned Pluto doesn't make the grade under the new rules for a planet: "a celestial body that is in orbit around the sun, has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a ... nearly round shape, and has cleared the neighborhood around its orbit."


Wired News article

I was skeptical before about the pluto drama going on,but i have to say that i agree with this recent decision. If we didnt then we would be calling numerous objects in the kaiper belt planets.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 05:21 PM
link   
lets just hope we dont piss any aliens off calling pluto a dwarF planet. this could lead to galactic war. im very sad to hear its been demoted. i grew up thinking there were 9 planets and pluto was always interesting because so little seemed to be known about it, and we never had awesome pics of it like the other 8. what about the probe we sent to pluto? now its just going to check out a "dwarf planet" . what a waste of money. jk. all i have left to say is................................ SAVE PLUTO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ps : cmdrkeenkid is on record i think saying pluto shouldnt be classified with the other 8. his word and thoughts on such mean alot, so i guess ill accept this fact that pluto is not longer the 9th planet. but damn lets all have a moment of silence for we lost one of our brothers. peace

[edit on 24-8-2006 by elitegamer23]


Edn

posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Timeseer I'm not exactly sure where your comeing from. What exactly is wrong with reclasifying Pluto as a Dwarf Planet?

The main reason this is needed is because we are finding more and more Pluto sized objects creating a new clasification for these tiny objects simply makes sense.

Take the following example you have a metre rule its what you mesure with and is what you have always measued with however everything you measue has always been a metre or more. Now as the years go bye you have to measue things smaller than a metre this is starting to pose a problem to you because you can only measue in metres so what do you do? You create a new measurement to fit your situation thus the centimetre is born.

This is exactly the situation we are faceing now. 8 planets fine, 9 planets ok, but as the years go on were now finding 10-15-20 objects that are actually bigger then Pluto. Haveing 20 planets starts to complicate things so what it the easiest solution? Split them up into catagorys and now we have Planets and Dwarf-Planets.

[edit on 24-8-2006 by Edn]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555

Originally posted by Timeseer
You are not smart enough to understand this subject. Please reframe from speaking any further.

This isn't a matter of destruction of physical objects. This is about the destruction of science and of the common man.

Let me ask you this at the meeting to discuss what Pluto should be identified as... do you honestly think there were any Middle Class people there? People who make less than a hundred thousand dollars a year.


Whoa, dude. You need to cut back on the coffee a little. No way did this person deserve that.


Deserve what? I didn't call him any names. I didn't threaten him in any manner. I did speak of Mike Brown offensively, but wouldn't you agree if he is so eager to disprove pluto as planet that he just jumps on an investigation that leads him to "Xena." That man, Mike Brown, is a nuttcase... plain and simple.

Anyways you were the one that bolded the font to my statement. If anyone is taking it a little too offensively, it sure isn't me.



Originally posted by spanishcaravan
Ok,well it seems no one posted the actual requirements laid out for being classified a planet,so here you go.


Much-maligned Pluto doesn't make the grade under the new rules for a planet: "a celestial body that is in orbit around the sun, has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a ... nearly round shape, and has cleared the neighborhood around its orbit."


Wired News article

I was skeptical before about the pluto drama going on,but i have to say that i agree with this recent decision. If we didnt then we would be calling numerous objects in the kaiper belt planets.


Well maybe they should be called planest. Perhaps this is all just a little bit too much for you to swallow. You know 50 something planets. I mean it isn't like we would be identifying every tiny little asteroid and comet as a planet.


Originally posted by elitegamer23
lets just hope we dont piss any aliens off calling pluto a dwarF planet. this could lead to galactic war. im very sad to hear its been demoted. i grew up thinking there were 9 planets and pluto was always interesting because so little seemed to be known about it, and we never had awesome pics of it like the other 8. what about the probe we sent to pluto? now its just going to check out a "dwarf planet" . what a waste of money. jk. all i have left to say is................................ SAVE PLUTO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ps : cmdrkeenkid is on record i think saying pluto shouldnt be classified with the other 8. his word and thoughts on such mean alot, so i guess ill accept this fact that pluto is not longer the 9th planet. but damn lets all have a moment of silence for we lost one of our brothers. peace

[edit on 24-8-2006 by elitegamer23]


Why are you so eager to agree that Pluto shouldn't be considered a planet? I mean the new definition of a planet would identify both the Earth and Jupiter as Dwarf Planets.


Originally posted by Edn
Timeseer I'm not exactly sure where your comeing from. What exactly is wrong with reclasifying Pluto as a Dwarf Planet?


I find nothing wrong with calling Pluto a Dwarf or Tiny Planet. I do have much anger towards the current definition of a planet. Because it identified the Earth no longer a planet. Would you be angry if this, what we are standing on, is longer considered a planet? The Earth like Pluto, Neptune, Jupiter, and so many other objects in the Solar System do not have clearified neighborhoods around each of their orbits. You are aware of the Jovian Trojans right? A part of the Asteroid belt that lie within the orbit of Jupiter.


Originally posted by Edn
The main reason this is needed is because we are finding more and more Pluto sized objects creating a new clasification for these tiny objects simply makes sense.


True, but that just means we need to come up with some inter-definitional words for a planet. Like Giant Planet, Standard Planet, and Dwarf Planet in common terms. Of we could identify it as in scientific terms as Jovian, Terrestrial, and Plutinoan Planets.


Originally posted by Edn
Take the following example you have a metre rule its what you mesure with and is what you have always measued with however everything you measue has always been a metre or more.


You are dribbling now.



Originally posted by Edn
Now as the years go by you have to measue things smaller than a metre this is starting to pose a problem to you because you can only measue in metres so what do you do?


Are you talking about the Earth being like a meter. Mercury being like a meter or Pluto being like a meter. What you have just said is like what Christians say all the time in reference to Jesus to Jews. So I would like it alot of you speak in a different manner.


Originally posted by Edn
You create a new measurement to fit your situation thus the centimetre is born.


What about Dekameter or milimeter? And you are speaking more in terms of feet and inches rather than in meters in centimeters. Sorry but you are definitely not that smart. LOL!


Originally posted by Edn
This is exactly the situation we are faceing now. 8 planets fine, 9 planets ok, but as the years go on were now finding 10-15-20 objects that are actually bigger then Pluto. Haveing 20 planets starts to complicate things so what it the easiest solution?


The easiest solution is to stop bickering about the complications. If it is too complicated then like with Calculus don't bother with it or take your time understanding it.


Originally posted by Edn
Split them up into catagorys and now we have Planets and Dwarf-Planets.


But what are they categories of?

[edit on 24-8-2006 by Timeseer]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join