Heartland

We still have Uranus though!!!

you're 5 hours behind the darklings there, keef

scotty wrote:We still have Uranus though!!!

Woof!

So what is Pluto then? A black hole sun, a moon, an asteroid, a meteoroid, a comet?

A dwarff planet....

I'm SURE they went over this on QI a few years ago....

Ozpat wrote:

So what is Pluto then? A black hole sun, a moon, an asteroid, a meteoroid, a comet?

Nothing more than a case of planetary bigotry.

FUD!

9while9 wrote:
FUD!

Takes one to know one I guess.

emilystrange wrote:you're 5 hours behind the darklings there, keef

Five hours behind, Em's, I live in Forres, we still point at planes up here!!

Ozpat wrote:

9while9 wrote:
FUD!

Takes one to know one I guess.

Ozpat, I now promote you to FUDmaster

scotty wrote:

emilystrange wrote:you're 5 hours behind the darklings there, keef

Five hours behind, Em's, I live in Forres, we still point at planes up here!!

Hah! I don't even believe one ever passes back there

9while9 wrote:

Ozpat wrote:

9while9 wrote:
FUD!

Takes one to know one I guess.

Ozpat, I now promote you to FUDmaster

I was expecting something like that you basta'd.

mh wrote:

Indeed!

Just thought of this: Actually, Pluto never even was a planet, as there's never been a proper definition before

Obviousman wrote:Just thought of this: Actually, Pluto never even was a planet, as there's never been a proper definition before

That is pure Plutonian bollocks.

No reason to be desperate. We got Ceres and the 2003 UB313 thingy as a compensation. I just wonder what the astrologists will do with 2003 UB313 in, say gemini? Will that explain the nasty itch I have in my left hand?

get lives, people!

Keith, I will huv wurds oan Saturday.

James Blast wrote:get lives, people!

Pot.Kettle.Black

James Blast wrote:get lives, people!

Keith, I will huv wurds oan Saturday.

Tell them!

Just thought of this: Actually, Pluto never even was a planet, as there's never been a proper definition before

]

So how do we know that Earth is a planet then?
Who agreed the definition of a planet?

Pista wrote:

Just thought of this: Actually, Pluto never even was a planet, as there's never been a proper definition before

]

So how do we know that Earth is a planet then?
Who agreed the definition of a planet?

AFAIK No-one, before yesterday it was just some vague guessing (and earth is our mother planet so I guess very little scientists would deny that the name planet)

Pista wrote: So how do we know that Earth is a planet then?
Who agreed the definition of a planet?

I dunno. Go to some scientific world conference and file us a report.

BTW my Pluton (with an "n" coz ya know, I'm one of those damn Froggies ) is still doing well, even though he's not named after a planet any longer.

I've been following the story actually. As I recall, the original idea was to promote several bodies to planethood so the list would have been:

Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Ceres, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto, Charon, 2003 UB313 (proposed name "Xena" )

(Pluto and Charon would have been called a double-planet system)

But this list would have been subject to almost limitless expansion as further Kuiper Belt Objects are found, and if asteroids such as Pallas, Vesta, and Hygeia are found to be round (or nearly so) they would have to be added too under the definition they were using.

The revised proposal is for the "classical eight" planets to be called planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune) with the others demoted to "minor planets" if spherical (or nearly so) or "solar system bodies" otherwise.

Calling Pluto a planet, while historically* (and for many, emotionally) having its appeal, is in terms of its size (~2300 km diameter) smaller than several moons, including Earth's (Actually, two moons, Saturn's Titan and Jupiter's Ganymede, are larger than Mercury, but that's a different question.)

The new definition is that for a body to qualify as a planet is that:

1. It must have enough gravity that it is round, or nearly so.
2. It must be the gravitationally dominant body in its orbital neighbourhood.

Pluto doesn't qualify because it's just one of several Kuiper Belt objects (there may be hundreds, even thousands of them waiting to be discovered) and isn't even the biggest: 2003 UB313 is bigger. And Pluto's orbit (like most of the KBOs) is way out of the ecliptic and quite eccentric.

The Kuiper Belt is where comets come from: if Pluto were ever knocked out of its own orbit, once it got inside Jupiter's orbit it would have a fu'cking impressive tail! A damn sight more impressive than comet Hale-Bopp was if anyone remembers that.

Of course there are some who would argue that there are only four planets in the solar system: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune. Everything else is too small.

* Historically, under the original definition of "planet", the Sun and the Moon were planets...

markfiend wrote:...""minor planets" if spherical (or nearly so) or "solar system bodies" otherwise."

The new definition is that for a body to qualify as a planet is that:

1. It must have enough gravity that it is round, or nearly so.
2. It must be the gravitationally dominant body in its orbital neighbourhood.

Dave won´t like beeing called a minor or even solar system body, I fear.
We ought to protest.