savepluto ([info]savepluto) wrote,
@ 2006-08-22 22:08:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Smoke-Filled Rooms
It used to be that only Chicago politicians made deals in the smoke-filled back rooms of their conventions.

To that list, we can now add astronomers.

According to the latest report on New Scientist Space, Astronomers lean toward eight planets, astronomers held a meeting "behind closed doors" in Prague on Tuesday and came up with a new draft resolution that demotes Pluto from its longtime status as a planet:


The crucial change in "draft c" is that a planet must be the dominant body in its orbital zone, clearing out any little neighbours. Pluto does not qualify because its orbit crosses that of the vastly larger Neptune....

It is still a work in progress, however, and the wording will change by Thursday in part to simplify it and make the final result more palatable to the public.


However, we shall not despair. Pluto may get to be called a "dwarf planet" or a "planetoid," meaning it will still have the word "planet" in its classification.

In other news, it appears that the Society for the Preservation of Pluto as a Planet now has a sworn enemy! Check out Demote Pluto! for an enjoyable read and a good laugh, but do NOT be swayed by the dark side of the gravitational force!

(7 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]shsilver
2006-08-23 02:49 am UTC (link)
I note that they're too chicken to identify themselves.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]rikchik
2006-08-23 01:37 pm UTC (link)
Actually, there's a tiny link to the likely main culprit from the FAQ page.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]savepluto
2006-08-23 02:13 pm UTC (link)
And if you run a check on the WHOIS database, you find the registrant is one Paulo Ordoveza...whose LiveJournal has "friended" this one! Welcome, Paulo!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]sdelmonte
2006-08-23 01:15 pm UTC (link)
1. I am not happy to hear that the final resolution is being hammered out in the back rooms. The longer this runs, the more it resembles a meeting of the UN Security Council, only without the Big Five's veto power.

2. It looks bad for Pluto. I really don't like this new qualification. Suppose Pluto were bigger than Neptune but still had this eccentric opbit? I'm starting to feel that everyone is rushing to latch onto one factor or another, rather than examine everything slowly. Maybe this really needs a much longer debate than the rushed one wwe are hearing about.

3. How about "bonsai planet"?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]savepluto
2006-08-23 02:03 pm UTC (link)
1. It does seem odd for a scientific discussion, which should be open to all, to take place in secret. The idea of scientific definitions being chosen by a democratic vote, on the other hand, would appear to be a bad precedent. At the very least, it might give ammunition to anti-evolution forces who would claim that it sets a precedent to "teach the controversy" on other issues.

2. We suspect that the issue will not be resolved until the IAU's 27th General Assembly. Unfortunately, that doesn't take place until August 2009. Up for a trip to Rio?

3. If the geology community can get up in arms about the term "pluton," then the botany community might take issue with "bonsai planet."

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]delkytlar
2006-08-23 01:46 pm UTC (link)
Well, they've linked to us, so at least they appear open to dialogue. :)

I can certainly understand why some people might make a reasoned, logical case against Pluto being a planet. There is nothing very scientific about raving on about one's "hatred of Pluto".

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]savepluto
2006-08-23 02:00 pm UTC (link)
As we here at SP3 noted before, [info]fizzixrat actually makes a good case against Pluto being a planet at http://fizzixrat.livejournal.com/63144.html.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(7 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…