Pluto's Planethood
Scientists are still conflicted about whether or not Pluto should be allowed back into the Pantheon of Planets of Our Solar System.
Pluto says: Ah, I love the struggle! Think long and deep and hard on this, Scientists. I want your most penetrating insights!
(sexual innuendos intended, of course)
This week's New Scientist Magazine (July 25, 2009 issue) has an article about the scientist's debate. They expect to have a clearer idea when NASA's New Horizon mission passes by Pluto in 2015. Pluto will be just finishing up his square to Uranus in Aries. One could have some interesting thoughts on just what kind of changes will have happened by then but why bother.
The article is called "Going Round in Circles: Poor Pluto was demoted, but could it be returned triumphantly to full Planet_____ (can't read my writing)?" Written by Stephen Battersby(can't read my writing again but I think that's his name).
What's weird is the description of how Pluto behaves up there in the sky. Eerily matches its Astrological interpretations. From p. 45:
We already know that its atmosphere expands and contracts over the seasons and is stirred by large-scale electromagnetic waves, both by observing how Pluto's atmosphere bends light when it passes in front of stars."Pluto bends light. Doi.
On the other hand I just read an article about how a Yale Psychiatrist says that seeing a light over a doorway and thinking that its a message from a dead relative is a sign of psychosis.
((((sigh))))
Linear thinkers. Can't live with them and can't live without them.
Labels: Pluto
posted by Out The Comet's Ass @ 12:25 PM
2 Comments:
Pluto does not need to be "allowed back into the pantheon of planets of our solar system," as it has never left that pantheon.
Only four percent of the IAU voted on the controversial demotion of Pluto, and most are not planetary scientists. Hundreds of professional astronomers immediately signed a formal petition rejecting the IAU decision. These scientists favor a broader planet definition that includes any non-self-luminous spheroidal body orbiting a star. The spherical part is important because objects become round when they are large enough for their own gravity to pull them into a round shape. This is a characteristic of planets, not of shapeless asteroids.
By accepting the IAU decree that "Pluto is no longer a planet," we give the IAU a legitimacy and authority to define what is face, which they most certainly do not deserve. The IAU definition is one interpretation in an ongoing debate, not fact. Opposing interpretations should be given equal legitimacy.
Thank you for the informative comment, Laurel.
This is turning into a fun argument. This all makes sense in my warped brain because Pluto was demoted just as he hit the Galactic Center. I've read somewhere that Earth will be very close to the Galactic Center in 2012 so maybe the IAU will demote our planet at that time.
By the way, is that true, the Earth nearest the Galactic Center? I saw a book somewhere and haven't really heard more about it.
Post a Comment
<< Home