Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Pluto's planet status
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 31 of 39 (343892)
08-27-2006 4:40 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by jar
08-26-2006 12:12 PM


You can have someone's eye out with that...
some busybody name Copernicus stuck his nose in
and then Tyco Brahe stepped up and smushed even that
Tyco Brahe got the 'point' when he stuck his nose in too far.
Sorry - puerile pun productions punishable by posting privelage pauses.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by jar, posted 08-26-2006 12:12 PM jar has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 32 of 39 (343934)
08-27-2006 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by ikabod
08-27-2006 4:09 AM


do we have a new holst of planets yet?
the term dwarf is already use to class stars
We also already have giant planets (the gas giants) so this is just more in that line as well.
So now we can add a bunch of other "ice dwarfs" ... like 2003 UB313, which is bigger than Pluto ... and has a moon (nicknamed "gabriella" to go with the nickname "xena" for the planet dwarf planet -- both unofficial as yet)
... but we also have added at least one 'rock' dwarf (Ceres, former asteroid), as it has has ~1/3rd the mass of all the asteroid belt combined and may have an atmosphere, and was the first planet to be demoted from full planet status: it returns now as a dwarf planet.
There are other sizable rocks in the belt, but they appear to be irregular in shape (can't pull themselves into a sphere), so the ability to be spherical can be used as a limit to the classification of a planet, with the asteroids essentially being planet fragments or partial planets, but this would discriminate agains rock dwarfs compared to ice dwarfs where there is less resistance to forming a ball shape for the same mass eh?
But when you come down to {{{all planets in the solar system}}} you will have to include the dwarf planets now for a complete discussion (especially if you are going to go all PC on it, what with including giants, and middle-sized, and not implying that "dwarfs" don't cut it). Certainly any kid doing a science project to show the solar system would include every body they could find in the literature eh?
There is also the question whether pluto is a main dwarf planet or part of a binary duo, seeing as charon and pluto orbit a common center outside either body (not sure what the other 3 moons orbit, pluto or the common center -- ie inside or outside charon).
Using the location of a common center outside a body as a defining characteristic of "binary" would also keep the moon as a moon rather than a binary "rock dwarf".
On the other hand using the existance of an atmosphere as a characteristic of a planet would mean that our moon and several others could be considered rock dwarf planets. But where do you draw the line on what is an atmosphere and what is part of the planet -- especially for the outer bodies (are the ice dwarfs anything more than frozen atmosphere?)
Such a problem.
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : No reason given.

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by ikabod, posted 08-27-2006 4:09 AM ikabod has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by ringo, posted 08-28-2006 2:11 PM RAZD has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 33 of 39 (344287)
08-28-2006 1:12 PM


Pluto sues!
Quite frankly, I'm surprised noone here has mentioned this yet. So, to break tradition for the third time, I'll break the news to you.
Pluto sues - removed raw url and replaced with 'Pluto sues' link to avoid screen stretching issues - AdminMod
Edited by AdminModulous, : removed raw url and replaced with 'Pluto sues' link to avoid screen stretching issues

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Modulous, posted 08-28-2006 1:33 PM Taz has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 34 of 39 (344292)
08-28-2006 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Taz
08-28-2006 1:12 PM


Re: Pluto sues!
Pluto might be suing but their case is hurt due to some ill advised reactive action they took hours after the votes had been counted...
photobucket rocks! use photobucket etc! Woo!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Taz, posted 08-28-2006 1:12 PM Taz has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Archer Opteryx, posted 08-28-2006 6:37 PM Modulous has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 35 of 39 (344309)
08-28-2006 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by RAZD
08-27-2006 11:47 AM


Re: do we have a new holst of planets yet?
What I'm wondering is: what kind of redefinitions would be necessary to get earth busted down to buck-planet?
Are we still so geocentric in our views that we will always be a full-fledged planet (Planet First Class)?

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by RAZD, posted 08-27-2006 11:47 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by RAZD, posted 08-28-2006 9:33 PM ringo has replied

  
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 3597 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 36 of 39 (344408)
08-28-2006 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Modulous
08-28-2006 1:33 PM


Re: ill-advised reaction
Yow. That Kuiper Belt is one rough neighborhood.
No wonder the taxis never go there.

Archer
All species are transitional.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Modulous, posted 08-28-2006 1:33 PM Modulous has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 37 of 39 (344478)
08-28-2006 9:33 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by ringo
08-28-2006 2:11 PM


Re: do we have a new holst of planets yet?
What I'm wondering is: what kind of redefinitions would be necessary to get earth busted down to buck-planet?
LOL. Is that a private joke?
I think "rock planet" is more appropriate, as it is much more descriptive of the group than "terrestrial" -- what other planet is really "terrestrial" eh?

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by ringo, posted 08-28-2006 2:11 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by ringo, posted 08-28-2006 11:51 PM RAZD has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 38 of 39 (344544)
08-28-2006 11:51 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by RAZD
08-28-2006 9:33 PM


Re: do we have a new holst of planets yet?
what other planet is really "terrestrial" eh?
None of the local ones, but somewhere out there...?
We have "the Moon" and lots of other "moons" that are "lunar" even if they're not very Moon-like.
Why not other "earths" that are "terrestrial" without being Earth-like?
Edited by Ringo, : Spellling.

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by RAZD, posted 08-28-2006 9:33 PM RAZD has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 39 of 39 (344617)
08-29-2006 6:17 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Archer Opteryx
08-26-2006 11:42 AM


Re: Dodgy terminology
I understand the precedent was set by the terms stars and dwarf stars already in use.
What's the story on that? Is a dwarf star considered a star?
Yep white dwarfs, dwarfs and subdwarfs are all still referred to as stars. Yet in this case, a dwarf planet is not a planet.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Archer Opteryx, posted 08-26-2006 11:42 AM Archer Opteryx has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024