Tallest Skil
Banned
Why did Pluto get discovered so early compared to say Eris? Could Eris be discovered earlier? It'd really mess with the definition of a 'planet'.
Crazy far, super dark.
Why did Pluto get discovered so early compared to say Eris? Could Eris be discovered earlier? It'd really mess with the definition of a 'planet'.
Not when they thought it was the size of the Earth, it sure wasn't.
And under the IAU's definition of "planet", Earth, Mars, Jupiter, and Neptune aren't planets either.
Except for their footnote stating they are.
So it's truly nothing more than a racket to force a double standard on the entire world.
Not when they thought it was the size of the Earth, it sure wasn't.
And under the IAU's definition of "planet", Earth, Mars, Jupiter, and Neptune aren't planets either.
Not when they thought it was the size of the Earth, it sure wasn't.
And under the IAU's definition of "planet", Earth, Mars, Jupiter, and Neptune aren't planets either.
Except for their footnote stating they are.
So it's truly nothing more than a racket to force a double standard on the entire world.
(1) A planet [1] is a celestial body that (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit.
Please explain your reasoning.
None of those planets have cleared their neighborhood, under the IAU definition.
Then you get the IAU coming back and saying "well, that's not what we mean, (despite explicitly stating it in the definition itself) we mean 'is the dominant body in the region'.", which even then immediately makes Pluto a planet since it's the largest object anywhere near the Kuiper Belt. And it makes Eris a planet because it's all out there on its lonesome, and is bigger than anything else out there.
My children will learn of the ten planets and the racket to short them to eight, I'll tell you.
And what happens if we DO find that gas giant out at the fringes? It magically becomes a planet without question? Total crock.
You seem ____ bitter about double standards, in this case to fit the desires of a vocal minority.
None of those planets have cleared their neighborhood, under the IAU definition.
Then you get the IAU coming back and saying "well, that's not what we mean, (despite explicitly stating it in the definition itself) we mean 'is the dominant body in the region'.", which even then immediately makes Pluto a planet since it's the largest object anywhere near the Kuiper Belt.
And it makes Eris a planet because it's all out there on its lonesome, and is bigger than anything else out there.
My children will learn of the ten planets and the racket to short them to eight, I'll tell you.
And what happens if we DO find that gas giant out at the fringes? It magically becomes a planet without question? Total crock.
The definition you're insisting on would mean that the only planets in the solar system were Mercury and Venus, which is pretty damn ridiculous.
No, it's not. Pluto is locked in a resonant orbit with Neptune (as near as matters, Pluto goes round the sun twice for every three times Neptune does), which makes Neptune the dominant object in that neighborhood, not Pluto.
So far.
Then you're doing them a disservice. Your outrage does not overrule reality.
First of all, it's extremely unlikely we will
…if so, not at first.
It's almost as though they should have used different words if they wanted to use a definition that didn't apply to the words they used, isn't it?
And Neptune Uranus. Guess Neptune's still not a planet.
It overrules pathetic and arbitrary definitions for the purpose of keeping one faction's belief in the "status quo".
People got laughed at when they suggested extrasolar planets… 20 years ago.
Imagine what we'll laugh at 20 years from now.
Gas giant? You bet your britches the IAU will instantaneously declare it a planet. "Legally."
This I want to see a cite for, because it's garbage.