Pluto and Ceres may finally regain full planet status

[qubit]

I've always thought the official definition for a planet was pretty daft and that Pluto shouldn't have been demoted to a dwarf planet. Looks like Ceres should also have full planet status.

The definition includes things such as whether it's orbiting a star, where it's orbiting that star and finally the most stupid of all whether it has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit. This last one isn't even formally defined, so how the hell can it be used as a definition! Even the earth wouldn't be classed as a planet if located in the wrong part of the solar system, which is plainly ridiculous.

It should be based on the properties of the object and nothing else.

This IFL Science article agrees with me, too.

Unlike the larger planets, however, Ceres, like Pluto, according to the IAU definition, “has not cleared the neighborhood around its orbit.” The asteroid belt is, apparently, Ceres' neighborhood while the Kuiper Belt is Pluto’s neighborhood – though no definition of a planet’s neighborhood exists, and no agreed upon understanding of what “clearing the neighborhood” yet exists. Furthermore, no broad-based agreement exists as to why “clearing the neighborhood” need be a requirement in order for an object to be considered a planet.

Read the rest at IFL Science.

 

[CAPSLOCKSTUCK]

Totally agree with you, it was always a silly argument that made notable people look ridiculous.


1. How massive would Pluto be if it "cleared " the Kuiper Belt ?
2. How would that combined mass then affect gravity and orbits of the other planets.?

(@qubit i'm not expecting answers to 1 + 2 )

 

[twilyth]

Eliminating Pluto really screwed up my horoscope so I'd be happy to see it "return."

 

[qubit]

Eliminating Pluto really screwed up my horoscope so I'd be happy to see it "return."

Good point, there's nothing more important than the horrorscope!

 

[DarkOCean]

Eliminating Pluto really screwed up my horoscope so I'd be happy to see it "return."

lol. good one

 

[rtwjunkie]

I'm looking forward to finding out if we can discover what the bright spots on Ceres are once in orbit.

 

[CAPSLOCKSTUCK]

How an Ion Drive Helped NASA's Dawn Probe Visit Dwarf Planet Ceres

NASA probe that takes four days to go from 0 to 60 mph is about to make space exploration history.

NASA's Dawn spacecraft is scheduled to arrive at the dwarf planet Ceres, the largest object in the main asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, early Friday morning (March 6).

If all goes according to plan, Dawn will become the first probe ever to orbit a dwarf planet, as well as the first to circle two celestial bodies beyond the Earth-moon system. (Dawn, which launched in September 2007, studied the protoplanet Vesta, the asteroid belt's second-largest denizen, up close from July 2011 through September 2012.) [Amazing Photos of Dwarf Planet Ceres]


http://www.space.com/28732-nasa-daw...=559174#ooid=IwY2hqcjrFyiIhSIV_2ktnDbsnhBafZs

 

[dorsetknob]

"Quote "according to the IAU definition, “has not cleared the neighborhood around its orbit.” unquote

Then by that definition
Mars, Jupiter, Saturn ,Uranus and Neptune ALSO have failed to have not cleared the neighborhood around their orbit's

each of the above has two or more objects sharing their orbit (moons asteroids ring particles ).

By the above definition only Mercury and Venus have cleared their orbits and neighborhood around their orbit's

guess we inhabit a 2 planet star system then

Its all IAU BULLSHIT our system is 9 Planets

PLUTO is a Planet it has 5 ( FIVE ) known moons and a possible ring system

Edit

There is a school of thought that considers Jupiter to be Failed Brown Dwarf Star

It has its own planetary system
It out puts more energy than it receives from the sun

Maybe 2001 was right just turn the MONOLITH Starter key "this is Jupiter we have Ignition"

 

[rtwjunkie]

"Clearing its orbit" does not mean a planet has no objects that are captured in orbit around its own gravity. It means the orbit path is not shared by other separate objects that the planet could potentially run into.

Note: Collisions with lone asteroids doesn't count because those are intersecting paths, not sharing the path.

 

[qubit]

"Clearing its orbit" does not mean a planet has no objects that are captured in orbit around its own gravity. It means the orbit path is not shared by other separate objects that the planet could potentially run into.

Note: Collisions with lone asteroids doesn't count because those are intersecting paths, not sharing the path.

Thing is, it's not fully defined, yet the IAU are using it in a formal definition, so it's invalid. This is what happens when politics pollutes science.

Clearing its orbit is stupid anyway, the definition should rely on the physical properties of the object only.

 

[rtwjunkie]

Thing is, it's not fully defined, yet the IAU are using it in a formal definition, so it's invalid. This is what happens when politics polutes science.

Clearing its orbit is stupid anyway, the definition should rely on the physical properties of the object only.

True, they could have done a better job on it, but lucky for us they appear to be defining it as I laid out, which is why we are about to get Pluto back and gain a 10th planet in our Solar System.