Jump to content

Pluto No Longer A Planet


Recommended Posts

Well being a NASA-head and watching way to much nasa TV, i already knew this was coming. I gotta say i agree with the decision. Even though its been beaten into us at school that there are 9 planets, and pluto is the last one, it has finnaly been decided to clasify pluto as a dwarf planet, finnaly making sense of all the Keiper belt objects.Read More Here:[url="http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20060824/sc_space/breakingnewsplutodemotednolongeraplanet"]http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20060824/sc_...nolongeraplanet[/url]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm more excited about the discovery of dark matter rather than beuraucratic nonsense in planet classification. I just don't understand why they bother wasting their time negotiating the definition of a planet. It's really not that important in my mind - it just gives the publishing industry an excuse to shove new textbooks down school's throats. I just think there are better ways to spend time and money."This just in - Pluto demoted to 'dwarf planet' for being a dick to Uranus."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow. when i heard this news, i literally crapped my pants. this is going to turn the astronomy (and hopefully the astrology) on its head. you're right. the discovery of dark matter is way more significant than what some empty suits think a planet should be.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the discovery of dark matter really isnt that important. And its not really a discovery. Dark matter has been around for a while, and the theories behind it, and calculations for it have been as well. The only new thing with dark matter is that weve finnaly observed it doing something other than baffling scientists. Still dont know what dark matter is, so i dont feel that its that important just yet.And i admit, Pluto being demoted isnt that grand of a subject, but i find it intresting. Ive been following it for years, with it being a planet, not, being a planet, not. Its just good to see the finnaly closed the case on it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='EvansLight']the discovery of dark matter really isnt that important. And its not really a discovery. Dark matter has been around for a while, and the theories behind it, and calculations for it have been as well.[/quote] It's the closest thing to proof of it even existing that we have so far. It is a discovery because it's the first time we've observed it's effects directly.Dark matter is exteremly important to a number of theories - and while this discovery doesn't provide direct access to additional research or proofs in and of itself - it's a significant piece of evidence. Most of theoretical physic is based on such evidence. Our observation of space is all that lets us understand the makeup our universe.I'm saving craping my pants for LISA.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='MrGuy']Dark matter isn't important, it only makes up like 25% of the universe or something...[/quote] umnm try around 80-90%im not saying dark matter isnt important. Its just its not really all that new, and this new discovery is just some proof to the theories. Nothing more.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Tangiers']Yeah...big deal...no longer a planet, now a new term which we call "dwarf planet". What a waste of time and lifespan.[/quote] hey means theres not gonna be 100s of planets, and also ends the debate allowing them to concentrate on the more important matters.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its all a matter of classification. Its so they don't have to send anything out there and they can say "We explored every planet in the solar system". It falls under the bard:"A rose by any other name..." or in other words, call it what you will, it doesn't change the item in question.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='frontmanpb101']so what are us scorpios supposed to do about our ruling planet no longer being a planet?[/quote] i guess it just proves that all of that astrology stuff is just a bunch of malarkey.as if the position of the stars and planets has any kind of influence on anything.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='DarthHookah']i guess it just proves that all of that astrology stuff is just a bunch of malarkey.  as if the position of the stars and planets has any kind of influence on anything.[/quote]I hate to break it to you, but the positions of interstellar bodies do have effect - all things are connected through AT LEAST known physics. Likely not in everyday life - but most certainly in longer spans. Until we have a successful 'theory of everything' then everything is fair game. Even then, the chances of other forces being at work still exist.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly, planet or not, it is an influence.I've read about the subject and I am still undecided. I have read old Crowley/Waite stuff that was written before Pluto was discovered. Before that, the 22 major arcana of a tarot deck were distributed very differently including four that were given to the four cardinal elements. So, presumably, astrology only accounts for what is known to the human mind. If astrology is correct, then unfortunately there are planets and stars all over that affect us, yet we don't pay any attention to them. That makes its practice a little suspect, in my way of thinking.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok then, what effect can they possibly have? how can jupiters position possibly determine if i am to come into good fortune? or if i should stay indoors?how can pluto's existence have anything to do with my personality? of course, i do know that somehow the moon's gravitational pull may bring out the animal in some people, but come on. the doctor delivering the baby has more gravitational pull on the infant than mars does.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your guess isn't inline with physics. You should check out Michio Kaku's 'Parallel Worlds' if you want an awesome run down of ALMOST the current state of theoretical physics - it was published last year and things are constantly in evolution - but it's pretty close.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, within the bounds of understanding, Pluto was thought to be much larger years ago, since Charon is so large and very close to it. They have discovered two more moons orbiting Pluto, making it a fairly good sized clump of rock, so to speak. Of course, 2003 UB313 is larger than Pluto, but its satellite, puny in comparison with Charon, so Pluto is still the largest clump in the dwarven planets. Also, check out Cedna in you'se spare time, an orbital period of some 12000 Years! List of interesting Stuff to look up:Object Diam(Km) Orbit(Yr) Orbit(in AU)  Area2060 Chiron  135  51  14  Centaur10199 Chariklo  275  63  16  Centaur5145 Pholus  185  92  20  CentaurNeptune 49528  165  30  PlanetPluto 2306  248  39  Kuiper Belt 90482 Orcus  1300  247  39  Kuiper Belt Charon 1200  248  39  Kuiper Belt 38083 Rhadamanthus 200  246  39  Kuiper Belt 28978 Ixion  822  249  40  Kuiper Belt 2003 AZ84  700 40  Kuiper Belt38628 Huya  500  250  40  Kuiper Belt 2002 MS4  730 42  Kuiper Belt2003 EL61  1500  285  43  Kuiper Belt 50000 Quaoar  1200  286  43  Kuiper Belt 20000 Varuna  936  283  43  Kuiper Belt 55637 2002 UX25   900  277  43  Kuiper Belt 55636 2002 TX300 800  283  43  Kuiper Belt 15760 1992 QB1 289  44  Kuiper Belt 2005 FY9  1800  310  46  Kuiper Belt55565 2002 AW197  700  327  47  Kuiper Belt 48639 1995 TL8a   350  378  52  Kuiper Belt 48639 1995 TL8b   160  378  52  Kuiper Belt 84522 2002 TC302 1200  408  55  Kuiper Belt 2004 XR190  640  431  57  Kuiper Belt 2003 UB313  2400  557  67.2  Kuiper Belt 15874 1996 TL66  630  755  83  Kuiper Belt Sedna 1500  12000  526  Oort Cloud
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...