This Solar System is Not the Solar System You Once Knew

[ellyssian]

Pluto is no longer a planet.

I think the reason why is rather weak, at least as stated in this blurb on NPR:

The International Astronomical Union strips Pluto of its planetary status. The group says a planet must, among other things, have "cleared the neighborhood around its orbit." Because Pluto's orbit overlaps Neptune's, Pluto is out. The celestial body formerly known as the ninth planet will be reclassified as a "dwarf planet."

From the American Heritage Dictionary:

A nonluminous celestial body larger than an asteroid or comet, illuminated by light from a star, such as the sun, around which it revolves.

Hmmm, that still covers it.

If Pluto is out because it overlaps the orbit of Neptune, than how has Neptune cleared its own orbit? From nine to eight to seven...

And Earth, she still hasn't shaken off all those parasitic hairless apes, so she hasn't cleared her orbit... And Saturn, why, those rings stick like glue!

Yes, certainly I'm being silly. So are they.

I think I shall have to make a FraudianFreudian Slip, and call them Astrologers instead of Astronomers.

It's really funny when you do that. Their eyes go all bulgey, and their skin turns fire engine red and steam comes out of their ears and they start stammering protestations in a nonsensical but offended tone.

It's slightly more fun then watching them perform other comedic acts, such as grabbing headlines by picking at nits instead of moving on to real, actual, useful discoveries.

Comments

[wolflady26.livejournal.com]

Clearing the orbit sounds waaaayyy too much like a Scientology thing.

[ellyssian.livejournal.com]

Oy, that's scary.

In a completely different direction, the way you said "Clearing the orbit" somehow made me think of it in terms closer to planetary enemas, which is just wrong, but, like Scientology, very popular in Hollywood. Hmmm, maybe it's not all that different...

[crowyhead.livejournal.com]

>A nonluminous celestial body larger than an asteroid or comet, illuminated >by light from a star, such as the sun, around which it revolves.

The problem with this definition is that scientists have discovered loads of asteroids of similar size to Pluto, which means they either need to declare that the solar system's just expanded by about thirty planets, or they need to revise what's considered a planet.

[ellyssian.livejournal.com]

I haven't been following news from the field, but if those asteroids are nonluminous, larger than an asteroid or comet, illuminated by light from a star around which they revolve, are they really asteroids?

And if some object comes into the orbit of a planet, does it cease being one, because it can't clear that object from its orbit?

The definition - that I've seen, and, admittedly, I didn't look too far, just grabbed the first site that explained why instead of just reporting what - anyway, that definition is not definitive.

I did find an article about how the proposal on the table would not only have confirmed Pluto's status, but would have added 3 other planets - they were proposing a somewhat altered definition that included specific size parameters.

[elaine-today.livejournal.com]

Poor Pluto. It's been demoted and it wasn't for anything it did as a planet. It must feel so confused..."my criteria was good enough when they hired me, and no new evidence has been uncovered not performing on par...What did I do wrong???

[ellyssian.livejournal.com]

Well, there were a few things that were brought up in his last review.