Pluto is dead...

rockstar · Post by **rockstar** » Thu Aug 24, 2006 11:26 pm

I've just read the news on Google and stumbled over an article about the results of the debate of the IAU in Prague. They've decided to split Planets into two categories now - we now have "planets" and "dwarf planets". Pluto lost his status as planet and the number of planets in our star star system is now reduced to eight.
The three new candidates - Xeres, Xena and Charon - had no chance of getting an planet-like status.

Here's an article from Associated Press on Mercury News

Maybe some of you guys might be interested...

plueschinger · Post by **plueschinger** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 12:16 am

Hiho rockstar!

I was thinking the whole evening to start this thread,
you were faster than me.

And if a conference of scientists decide, that we ( the human race) are all a part of a computer-simulation, what then?

Regards
Plueschinger

Post by **loki1950** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 2:06 am

ask for a refund or reprograming maybe; the awnser is 42

even Pluto's discoverier was not sure of planetary status the orbit was problamatic and the mass was not right.

Enjoy the Choice

Zeog · Post by **Zeog** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:07 am

rockstar wrote:I've just read the news on Google and stumbled over an article about the results of the debate of the IAU in Prague. They've decided to split Planets into two categories now - we now have "planets" and "dwarf planets". Pluto lost his status as planet and the number of planets in our star star system is now reduced to eight.

Yes, that was quite a thriller. Despite that this is just arguing about a definition it quite raised the public's awareness of how crowded the solar system is. And we didn't start talking about NEOS (near earth objetcs) yet. If you think that that there are just a few other objects out there look at this: http://szyzyg.arm.ac.uk/~spm/

rockstar wrote:The three new candidates - Xeres, Xena and Charon - had no chance of getting an planet-like status.

Actually, they had a chance to become a planet, because the first proposal of a planet definition would had included them as planets. Now, they're already having the "dwarf planet" status. Their names aren't right though. The dwarf planet orbiting sun between Mars and Jupiter is called Ceres not Xeres. What you call Xena hasn't been officially named yet. Currently it is officially called 2003 UB313 but inofficially refered to as "Xena" or "Lila".

Why reading newspapers? Here is the official announcement from the IAU: http://www.iau2006.org/mirror/www.iau.o ... index.html

Oblivion · Post by **Oblivion** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 11:52 am

Next they'd be classifying all planetoids as teeny tiny dwarf planets. Then gas giants as very dark brown (lol) dwarves. Then classify all asteroid bodies orbitting palnets as moons (of course they are, at least.. satellites..

), then finally Earth will be classified as nothing more than Starbirth slag.

Oh yeah... the Moon will be classified as a Giant Satellite, as opposed to Dwarf Satellites, like the pebbles on Saturn's rings, lol.

rockstar · Post by **rockstar** » Fri Aug 25, 2006 12:29 pm

My apologies for the spelling mistake... it was quite late yesterday and I just thought it might be interesting to post it here. Well, and the news link ain't that informative... I read the news on Google.de and just switched over to Google.com to find something in english.

The public's awareness is a result of that until yesterday it was one of the well known and untouched facts of science that we had nine planets in our lovely little star system and Pluto was one of them - at least that's what I guess. We all learned that quite early in school, didn't we?! It's a major change in general knowledge, although it's indeed absolutly unimportant for everyday's life.

Oblivion · Post by **Oblivion** » Sun Aug 27, 2006 11:58 am

it WAS big news. It reached even our local stations. omigosh we only have 8 planets now.

wirser · Post by **wirser** » Mon Aug 28, 2006 8:48 pm

maybe we need a brand new way of looking at the universe. like for earthquakes etc,
so like a size 1 would be atomic or simple molecule size and up,
the term planet would apply to certian set of orbit possibilities,

I was waiting to hear pluto was going to be called a moon for a while

micheal_andreas_stahl · Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:55 pm

I think it is totally irrelivent to life. Though important to PR. Make all planets different sizes.

Post by **klauss** » Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:16 pm

Actually... I always knew 10 planets.

Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto & Charon.

What about Charon?
Is it a planet or not, in the end?

geoscope · Post by **geoscope** » Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:53 pm

Charon is Pluto's moon, and is if I remember correctly, slightly smaller than Phobos.

Post by **jackS** » Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:19 pm

I seem to recall Charon being almost as big as Pluto, leading to the shared orbital point being oddly placed - will check on that.

Edit: Ok, so it's not almost as big - but the ratio is noteworthy (earth-moon numbers provided for comparison).

Charon â€” Diameter: 1172 KM
Pluto â€” Diameter: 2274 KM

Moon â€” Diameter: 3476 KM
Earth â€” Diameter: 12,756.3 KM

(Phobos and Deimos are both <25KM in diameter)

Zeog · Post by **Zeog** » Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:51 pm

klauss wrote:What about Charon?
Is it a planet or not, in the end?

Officially, it's now a double dwarf planet together with Pluto. (A dwarf planet is not a planet, just smaller. It is a distinct class of objects.)

From the FAQ:

Q:Why is Pluto-Charon a “double [dwarf] planet” and not a “[dwarf] planet with a satellite”?

A: Both Pluto and Charon each are large enough (massive enough) to be spherical. Both bodies independently satisfy the definition of “[dwarf] planet”. The reason they are called a “double [dwarf] planet” is that their common centre of gravity is a point that is located in free space outside the surface of Pluto. Because both conditions are met: each body is “[dwarf] planet-like” and each body orbits around a point in free space that is not inside one of them, the system qualifies to be called a “double [dwarf] planet.”

(added the dwarf everywhere by hand as this was an old version)

Post by **klauss** » Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:12 pm

jackS wrote:Pluto â€” Diameter: 2274 KM
Moon â€” Diameter: 3476 KM

Go Moon!
I never realized it was that big. It never occurred to me comparing it to Pluto, and it never occurred to me that the Moon would win. Go Girl!*

(*) Moon, sp. "Luna", is a she: sp. "La luna".

Oblivion · Post by **Oblivion** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 7:09 am

it's interesting to not that the moon was always female.

Artemis, Diana, Selene, Luna, our won culture has myths of HER, we call her Bulan or Buwan. An especially poetic way of describing midnight in our dialect is "Udto sa Bulan" in english "Noon of the Moon".

The moon is actually quite small compared to Ganymede and Titan...

Zeog · Post by **Zeog** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 10:22 am

Oblivion wrote:it's interesting to not that the moon was always female.

The moon is male in German (the sun is a female) and in Hobbit speak as well, if I recall correctly.

Post by **loki1950** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 3:01 pm

Japanese also uses a male pronoun for the Moon.

Enjoy the Choice

geoscope · Post by **geoscope** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 4:01 pm

Filed under the list of things Japanese, Germans and Hobbits have in common. That'll make a good trivia question some day.

Oblivion · Post by **Oblivion** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 6:54 am

How about being ex-Axis?

Hobbits too probably.

Well, as I remember, to the elves , at least eldar of the western isles, the sun was male. Referred to as "aran". Hobbits share same language characteristics as the elves right? how come?

Well, I'm orucai anyway.

Vega Strike Forums

Pluto is dead...

Pluto is dead...

Re: Pluto is dead...

new system needed