Ok sow its offical.PLUTO IS NOT A OFFICIAL PLANET.How odd...Please discuss,fight,throw rotten cheese at astronomers,have fun...

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/space/08/24/pluto.ap/index.html

I'm all for it.

There's the humor of having people have to go back and rewrite textbooks, but there's also the point that more "classes" of celestial bodies is a good idea.

I say that because as we reach further and further out, it'll be easier to clearly describe what we're seeing.

Like, if you were in an orange grove, but someone had an apple tree growing amogst it, you wouldn't just ignorantly look at it all and say "there's 4,000 orange trees". You'd say, "there's 3,999 orange trees and one apple".

It might seem silly at first, but the more detailed a description of something is, the better it is at understanding the universe around you.

You wouldn't walk into the toy aisle and count Megablucks as Lego. They're very different though appearing similar from afar.

If you were a big business needing a special microchip produced, you wouldn't open the yellow pages to contact Bob's computer repair, you'd contact IBM.

Edited August 24, 200618 yr by JINZONINGEN 73

Hmm... now, most importantly, how does that affect Space?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/space/08/24/pluto.ap/index.html

You wouldn't walk into the toy aisle and count Megablucks as Lego. They're very different though appearing similar from afar.

How dare you say MegiPoop is SIMILAR to lego *gets offended*.But I hope our teachers have a ton of books to re write!Muhahaha!

Hmm... now, most importantly, how does that affect Space?

Mmm...Since the solar sytem is missing a planet we can build one out of lego?

Like, if you were in an orange grove, but someone had an apple tree growing amogst it, you wouldn't just ignorantly look at it all and say "there's 4,000 orange trees". You'd say, "there's 3,999 orange trees and one apple".

:-D I

:-D I

I also am glad to see this. First, as was already said, the more precise we can have our descriptions and definitions, the better. Better to do things now, and then move foreward. And second, it shows what science is really about. Science is not about set-in-stone truth, but about things we accept provisionally as true, but which we are open to being falsified eventually. This type of thing shows that science is at work, and not stagnant, or locked-down in preconceived notions. However, I wouldn't count on the older textbooks being changed. I'm sure the new ones will have the change(s) within a few years, but errors are nothing new in textbooks, and the teacher will probably just point out that the textbook is wrong in this instance, and inform the students of the latest decision.

*wub* *wub* Die Abenteuer der Maus auf dem Mars

(The Adventures of the Mouse on the Mars.... Maybe they should take out this tiny mars too....)

I also am glad to see this. First, as was already said, the more precise we can have our descriptions and definitions, the better. Better to do things now, and then move foreward. And second, it shows what science is really about. Science is not about set-in-stone truth, but about things we accept provisionally as true, but which we are open to being falsified eventually. This type of thing shows that science is at work, and not stagnant, or locked-down in preconceived notions. However, I wouldn't count on the older textbooks being changed. I'm sure the new ones will have the change(s) within a few years, but errors are nothing new in textbooks, and the teacher will probably just point out that the textbook is wrong in this instance, and inform the students of the latest decision.

Lazy authors... Well as far as im concerned Pluto was the death star witch blew up when the 6th SW move came out and it took long for the light to reach us thst why we know that pluto *or the death star* is no longer a planet but only space dust...

the entire debate is crap, really. before the start of the convention there was a majority to get 12 planets in our solar system, Charon, for instance , would finally be recognised as a planet, because it was one according to the definition. there are other planets standing even further away from the sun than pluto that will at one point in history be accepted as planets in our solar system. Downsising the solar system to 8 is just a typical conservative reaction to the explosion of discoveries in our universe; we've seen it with Copernicus, Galilei and others... oh well, in the end, it's only a category, a title, nothing more... if you wanna teach your kids there are but only 8, fine by me, however, it seems hardly relevant in any case and no doubt they'll re open this debate in no time, hoping they will find a majority to change it all just one more time...

Yep, Pluto is a plantatoid, people have been debating it for a long time now,

look at the all the planets in their neat, evenly spaced orbits and then you get to Pluto, there is really not much to debate about here.

And Pluto's not even the biggest of the planetoids that were being considered!

If it's "crap" that Pluto was taken off the planet list, would it still have been crap if a few others, larger than it, had been added?

...

...

...I hope they stick with "Xena" on the not yet named one.

What a waste of words and time with that crap :-|

And what about about the Third rock from the Sun ? Is that a real planet as well or nothing at all ? :-D :-P

*yoda*

wat was that idea of throwing cheese at astronomers again? ;-)

Damn, losing a keychain is understandable, but losing a whole planet?!! X-O

Damn, losing a keychain is understandable, but losing a whole planet?!! X-O

Shows how clumsy astronomers are these days... :-/

And Pluto's not even the biggest of the planetoids that were being considered!

If it's "crap" that Pluto was taken off the planet list, would it still have been crap if a few others, larger than it, had been added?

...

...

...I hope they stick with "Xena" on the not yet named one.

planets get created by definitions. add just one factor and you can limit the number of planets in our solar system even more, add two factors and you've decreased the number to 4... the question is not how many planets there are in the solar system and fit a definition to that, the question is to get a general definition for what a planet is, based on a few elements, like it has to rotate around a star; the problem with definitions in this case is that if you go too wide, you get too many different objects on your list, if you allow no flexibility at all, you get a list that's pracically useless on a universal scale... it's like a definition for the scientific concept of 'life' for instance...

You mention 'size' as a factor. Size has nothing to do with a definition for planets, just as it has nothing to do with the definition for a star. a neutron star, the sun and Betelgeuse are all stars even though a neutron star is smaller than our planet, Betelgeuse has about the size of our solar system. however, if size was a factor for this definition, then they should have allowed several other objects already...

the reason why this debate goes on and on is that the definition comes down to a description of factors. Some people give priority to one factor while other astronomers find other factors far more relevant ... in the end, it's about getting enough people behind your list of factors to form a new definition... and then there's politics. Some people/institutions support one specific option because they're conservative or progressive, because they started the debate decades ago, because they're a 'name' in the community,... Come on... we see this type of discussions in history almost on a weekly basis...

Somehow I feel uncomfortable with the declassement of Pluto. It somehow "felt" better knowing it to be the far out li'l bro to us... well, such is life and life changes a lot.

Damn, I was planning to sell my summer house there... Now I'll never get a decent price! *sad*

But let's look on the bright side - my space atlas is much more valuable now! *sweet*

and then there's politics. Some people/institutions support one specific option because they're conservative or progressive, because they started the debate decades ago, because they're a 'name' in the community,... Come on... we see this type of discussions in history almost on a weekly basis...

Political indeed:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5283956.stm

So like, out of ALL the people consulted for input on this, the "voters" had to be present at one single place, at one single time, right as they were called to it.

It's a tactic used by the politicians alot... like democrat, anti-gun senators used to do... they'd call congress to session in the middle of the night, only having given fore-warning to themselves. All the people on the other side would be dead asleep / away on business somewhere in the country, only to find out the next morning laws were passed.

Tricky tricky tricky. And WRONG.

Nice Save Pluto campaign:

See it at Worth1000.com

This was part of the introduction to the latest Think Geek newsletter:

"In just 3 short weeks, the heavens have been turned upside down and, whamo presto bammo, we lost Pluto. Just like that. It's forever removed from the realm of the nine (now referred to as the legion of the eight). The scientific powers that be stuck a fork in him, and well, he's done. We'll miss you Pluto. Despite how distant and morbidly cold you are and how unforgivably atypical your orbit is, you will be missed. But alas, after seventy six years we can seek solace in realizing that a larger debate has been settled for us. Size matters."

And now it's not called Pluto anymore.

X D

http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20060911/sc_...stanumber134340

On Sept. 7, the former 9th planet was assigned the asteroid number 134340 by the Minor Planet Center (MPC)

And now it's not called Pluto anymore.

X D

http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20060911/sc_...stanumber134340

On Sept. 7, the former 9th planet was assigned the asteroid number 134340 by the Minor Planet Center (MPC)

If I didn't know better, I'd swear you went to RI :-P That article was just posted there too, even though it came out on Monday