|
|
Post by Captain Galaxy on Aug 24, 2006 8:14:03 GMT -8
That's right, it is now considered a dwarf planet, because a bunch of scientists, with nothing to do, decided to get together and change the definition of a "planet." There are now only EIGHT planets. I don't know about you guys, but I think this is an OUTRAGE! It's like everything we learned about planets in our childhood has been thrown out the door. It's like saying the atlantic ocean isn't there anymore. It's like the world we know has been changed forever, but in a larger sense. SCREW THEM SCIENTISTS!
|
|
|
|
Post by Inaaca on Aug 24, 2006 13:29:58 GMT -8
So what's the new definition of a planet, then?
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Galaxy on Aug 24, 2006 17:51:07 GMT -8
The definition is not the issue here, it's that Pluto has just been denied!
|
|
|
|
Post by Inaaca on Aug 24, 2006 21:44:15 GMT -8
Yeah, I got that, but I'm curious. What's the definition? I'd like to know the reasons for why it was excluded in the first place.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Galaxy on Aug 25, 2006 3:12:17 GMT -8
A planet within our solar system is defined by the International Astronomical Union as a celestial body that is in orbit around the Sun, has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit. Those bodies which fulfill the first two conditions but not the third are dwarf planets if they are not satellites.
I like my definition better; Pluto, and including anything larger than Pluto, unless it is a moon to something much larger, is a planet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Inaaca on Aug 25, 2006 7:51:33 GMT -8
has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit. What, like atmosphere? |
|
|
|
Post by Muramasa on Aug 29, 2006 23:56:31 GMT -8
I think they mean additional space debris like asteroids, other drawf planents, and Turanic carriers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Inaaca on Aug 30, 2006 10:00:23 GMT -8
So are they ruling it out of the third definition because Neptune crosses its orbit? And well, if that's the case, wouldn't Neptune fall under the same criticism?
|
|
|
|
Post by You probably can't touch this. on Aug 30, 2006 11:03:05 GMT -8
The fact that the orbits of Neptune and Pluto cross are unimportant because they will never collide due to their orbital resonance.
Pluto isn't considered a full planet because it doesn't clear the Kuiper belt objects in its neighborhood.
|
|
|
|
Post by You probably can't touch this. on Aug 30, 2006 11:10:47 GMT -8
I like my definition better; Pluto, and including anything larger than Pluto, unless it is a moon to something much larger, is a planet. So, according to your definition, the newly-discovered, trans-Neptunian object named "2003 UB 313" would need to be classified as a planet. It isn't a moon and it is larger than Pluto. I'll stick with the astronomers' definition, thank you very much. |
|
|
|
Post by You probably can't touch this. on Aug 30, 2006 11:18:05 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Clewgurl on Sept 3, 2006 20:19:11 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Inaaca on Sept 3, 2006 20:38:20 GMT -8
Patrick knows his astronomy.
|
|
|
|
Post by You probably can't touch this. on Sept 4, 2006 23:42:17 GMT -8
I read the newspaper from time to time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Galaxy on Sept 5, 2006 14:06:10 GMT -8
I deliver the newspaper people read from time to time.  |
|
|
|
Post by Inaaca on Sept 5, 2006 17:38:23 GMT -8
Thus, through simple deductive reasoning, Patrick must read the paper that Adrian delivers! Perrrfection.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kuat on Sept 5, 2006 17:45:27 GMT -8
Thus, through simple deductive reasoning, Patrick must read the paper that Adrian delivers! Perrrfection. Next onto the caper of who moved my cheese! |
|
|
|
Post by Muramasa on Sept 5, 2006 20:48:42 GMT -8
PUNISHEEEERRR!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by You probably can't touch this. on Sept 6, 2006 11:19:47 GMT -8
Adrian, therefore, delivers the San Francisco Chronicle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Galaxy on Sept 6, 2006 15:54:28 GMT -8
These days, it seems like I deliver everything.
|
|
