So will this new discovery in regards to how big Pluto actually is will it possibly become a planet again?
Apparently not.
Now I'm no scientician but in my mind an object that orbits the sun regardless of its size should be a planet. I could do without the added parameters the Degrasse Tyson and the rest of the planetary society uses to downgrade Pluto to a dwarf planet but that's the reality. Those who work at the top of the astrophysics food chain make the decisions and that's how they see Pluto. Really, who are we to argue?
Looking at the rest of that list of non planets tells me one thing separates Pluto from the rest, they Orbit planets, not the sun. So why lump little old Pluto in there? Because it's smaller than europe? It weighs less than a lot of other planets moons? meh.
Colbert grilled Degrasse Tyson on this in a good way, I get the logic. But that doesn't mean I buy it.
Last edited by dammage79; 07-15-2015 at 11:28 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to dammage79 For This Useful Post:
Location: Close enough to make a beer run during a TV timeout
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by dammage79
Now I'm no scientician but in my mind an object that orbits the sun regardless of its size should be a planet.
What about the asteroids between Mars and Jupiter? There must be thousands, if not millions of them. There are also thousands of objects around Pluto, should they also be considered planets?
Pluto is about 1/2 the size of the next smallest planet- Mercury. The reason it was considered a planet in the first place was it was thought to be bigger than Mercury.
What about the asteroids between Mars and Jupiter? There must be thousands, if not millions of them. There are also thousands of objects around Pluto, should they also be considered planets?
Pluto is about 1/2 the size of the next smallest planet- Mercury. The reason it was considered a planet in the first place was it was thought to be bigger than Mercury.
I just said I was no scientician! So now I have to hone my own parameters to better make my argument. Atmosphere should be a requirement, perhaps your own moon could also make a solid argument.
I don't think there's anything bigger or close to Pluto in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter and the Kuiper belt probably has some other hidden gems on there too. I love the fact they're sending New Horizons on deeper into the Kuiper belt to focus on some other larger objects as well. But they're just on the outside of the Suns gravity no?
I thought Pluto was right on the bleeding edge of that.
i still can't help but think we should spend more time probing uranus
on a more serious note, i read something where this spacecraft may continue on to some dwarf planets that are a billion miles past pluto, it boggles my mind that we could send a vehicle that far and have it send back data......of course we all know that eventually this rig will return back to earth ala Vee-Ger and look for the creator
__________________
If I do not come back avenge my death
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by dammage79
I just said I was no scientician! So now I have to hone my own parameters to better make my argument. Atmosphere should be a requirement, perhaps your own moon could also make a solid argument.
I don't think there's anything bigger or close to Pluto in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter and the Kuiper belt probably has some other hidden gems on there too. I love the fact they're sending New Horizons on deeper into the Kuiper belt to focus on some other larger objects as well. But they're just on the outside of the Suns gravity no?
I thought Pluto was right on the bleeding edge of that.
Not sure why an atmosphere should be a requirement. Mercury barely has an atmosphere to speak of, and Pluto does have an atmosphere, though it too is very thin.
As for being outside the sun's gravity, if the Kuiper belt objects were outside the sun's gravity then there wouldn't be a kuiper belt. Technically the sun's gravity extends infinately, but if you are talking about the point at which it is no longer the dominant force, that extends well beyond the Kuiper belt. The Oort cloud extends up to 2 lightyears out, so we are nowhere near that boundry when we are talking about Pluto.
As for the Planet/not planet argument, there are other requirements other than/more important than size, one of which is that it has cleared the general vicinity of it's orbit, hence nothing in the asteroid belt is a planet because it's part of a region of general rubble that isn't domiated by one body, kind of like how Pluto is a part of the Kuiper belt, a collection of bodies that sort of occupy the same region.
In the end it's all semantics as it doesn't change what we can learn from visiting these places.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
Last edited by Bring_Back_Shantz; 07-15-2015 at 12:44 PM.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
