Should Pluto be a planet again?

[CivLuvah]

Should Pluto be a planet again? I mean, it's already stuck in our minds for the past 70 years & they removed it from our planets list?!?!? The IAU doesn't even know the meaning of diversity and uniqueness. Probably in the next decade they will declassify Mercury as a planet because its too close to the Sun. Pluto makes our solar system unique from the other solar systems in our galaxy. Plus there are somethings the IAU has missed in their criteria:

1.Pluto has 3 moons (DUH)
2.Pluto spins (DUH!!!)
3.Pluto spins around an AXIS (SUPER DUH!!!)
4.It spins in an elliptical orbit (SUPER ULTRA DUH!!!!)

So, what do you say about Pluto being a dwarf planet huh IAU! (Plus I think NASA is better than you)

"Life, loathe it or ignore it, you can't like it."
-Marvin, The Paranoid Andriod

 

[sepamu92]

The term "planet" is arbitrarily defined anyways. I don't even think there should be any single technical term for planets, since the terrestrial and jovian planets are so fundamentally different, and should probably be classified separately.

 

[Perfection]

Pluto is and shouldn't be defined as a planet. It does not share the properties that all 8 planets do share (being the dominant body in thier orbital positions that cause significant gravitational effects on thier vacinity).

I think the term "dwarf planet" is kinda stupid and would call it something else.

Also, Pluto is not particularly special in the solar system or beyond it. All the properties you listed occur on other Trans Neptunian objects.

 

[Truronian]

I've met the lady who (according to her) was largely responsible for Pluto's declassification.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

I think that grandfathering Pluto as a planet is absurd. Sure, it was considered a planet for 70 some years. But if I recall correctly, Ceres was considered a planet for longer; the sun and the moon were certainly considered planets for longer, a couple thousand years, before it was realized that they didn't fit. So that argument is silly.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Should Pluto be a planet again? I mean, it's already stuck in our minds for the past 70 years & they removed it from our planets list?!?!? The IAU doesn't even know the meaning of diversity and uniqueness. Probably in the next decade they will declassify Mercury as a planet because its too close to the Sun. Pluto makes our solar system unique from the other solar systems in our galaxy. Plus there are somethings the IAU has missed in their criteria:

1.Pluto has 3 moons (DUH)
2.Pluto spins (DUH!!!)
3.Pluto spins around an AXIS (SUPER DUH!!!)
4.It spins in an elliptical orbit (SUPER ULTRA DUH!!!!)

So, what do you say about Pluto being a dwarf planet huh IAU! (Plus I think NASA is better than you)

"Life, loathe it or ignore it, you can't like it."
-Marvin, The Paranoid Andriod

Asteroids spin around an axis and travel in an elliptical orbit. Comets travel in elliptical orbits. But they're not planets.

On the other hand, why not bow just this once to tradition? After all, much of what we commonly take for granted about things like the constellations is not scientifically valid anymore, but we keep it because of tradition.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

On the other hand, why not bow just this once to tradition? After all, much of what we commonly take for granted about things like the constellations is not scientifically valid anymore, but we keep it because of tradition.

Why stop there?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

To what are you referring? I personally have an emotional attachment to the idea of Pluto as a planet, that's all. And since it does have moons, it makes sense to me to classify it as a planet, no matter what its size is, or distance from the Sun.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

I am emotionally attached to the idea of the sun as a planet, does that matter? It seems that making an exception in a classification scheme in dference to tradition is hardly scientific.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

But the Sun doesn't, and never did, fit the definition of a planet. Pluto did, and that's the difference.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

But the Sun doesn't, and never did, fit the definition of a planet. Pluto did, and that's the difference.

Actually, there was no definition of planet - unless you mean the original one of "objects that appear to orbit the earth", in which case the sun does fit. But there was no modern scientific definition, not officially. It was applied on a case by case basis.

 

[Perfection]

To what are you referring? I personally have an emotional attachment to the idea of Pluto as a planet, that's all. And since it does have moons, it makes sense to me to classify it as a planet, no matter what its size is, or distance from the Sun.

Is this a planet? (note the moon)

Is this a planet? (note the lack of moon)

Moons are an absurd way to classify planets. And emotions? Emotions are for the weak!

 

[LucyDuke]

Pluto makes our solar system unique from the other solar systems in our galaxy.

Nah, people do.

I personally have an emotional attachment to the idea of Pluto as a planet, that's all. And since it does have moons, it makes sense to me to classify it as a planet, no matter what its size is, or distance from the Sun.

Well, nobody's going to stop you from classifying it as a planet, or a bowl of mashed potatoes for that matter.

 

[Perfection]

I might not stop him, but damnit, I'll try.

 

[warpus]

I've met the lady who (according to her) was largely responsible for Pluto's declassification.

Did you hit it?

 

[warpus]

To what are you referring? I personally have an emotional attachment to the idea of Pluto as a planet, that's all. And since it does have moons, it makes sense to me to classify it as a planet, no matter what its size is, or distance from the Sun.

Pluto doesn't have a moon, Pluto/Charon is a binary system.. pretty much.

 

[dwaxe]

Pluto is not a planet, but you can call it one just out of respect to its discoverers.

 

[CivLuvah]

Is this a planet? (note the moon)

Is this a planet? (note the lack of moon)

Moons are an absurd way to classify planets. And emotions? Emotions are for the weak!

I don't care. Just look at the obvious, mister.

 

[Perfection]

I agree, look at the obvious! Pluto is one of over a dozen of frozen iceballs orbiting outside Neptune (and that's frozen iceballs we know of, we're discovering more all the time, and it's not included the hundreds of smaller ice chunks that might not be balls but still are big hunks of ice). Hell, it's not even the biggest frozen iceball.

Look at all the other planets, they all line up nicely in neat orbital paths with very little debris in the way, where Pluto is in a field of like sized bodies.

So yeah, it's plainly obvious Pluto isn't a planet, and is why the experts on planets decided it isn't one.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Perfection, you may try to stop me from calling anything a bowl of mashed potatoes, but at least refer to me as a "her" -- thanks.

Planets are round. So no, that lumpy object is not a planet. A planet does not need a moon to be a planet.

Earth and the Moon are actually orbiting a common center of gravity (which, due to our size, is located somewhere inside Earth). Does that mean the Moon is not a moon?

Personally, I have no problem with referring to Pluto as a planet, because of tradition. Rules lists are full of exceptions, and we still get along okay. Just let this be one of the exceptions for the population at large -- the astronomers can reclassify things all they please, but I suspect it may be a couple of generations before the automatic thought of Pluto as a planet is stamped out of popular culture's consciousness.