480 replies to this topic

[moefuzz]

An interesting Editorial article in Astronomy magazine seems to have some merit...

 

https://www.astronom...pluto-a-planet/

 

 

 

"in 2006, the International Astronomical Union (IAU) reconsidered Pluto’s status. In a controversial vote, astronomers — not planetary scientists — “demoted” Pluto to the status of being classified as a dwarf planet, taking away one major planet and reducing the number in our solar system to eight".....

 

 

I'm not gonna give away the ending but I will tell you the Author

(David J. Eicher editor of Astronomy) brings up 1 very valid point that

if we were to use the same reasoning that reduced Pluto from planet to "not a planet", it could also potentially place Earth amongst the list of "Not Planets".

 

 

 

Pluto's Mountain Plains;

 

 

 

 

.                                                                        these pics were not from

Nikon P1000 at F5.6 with maximum zoom,

-they were from the New Horizons interplanetary space probe launched as a part of NASA's New Frontiers program :Flyby of 2015

https://en.wikipedia...ki/New_Horizons

 

 

Go Pluto!!!

 

 

.

Edited by moefuzz, 04 January 2024 - 08:59 AM.

[Jim Davis]

Ceres should be a planet, too.

 

[edsmx5]

I'm just an old fart; Pluto will always be a planet to me ( reciting the planets names just doesn't sound right w/out Pluto at the end)

[timmywampus]

That was a short read, but a good one. Thanks for the post. 

[moefuzz]

.

 

 

That was a short read, but a good one. Thanks for the post. 

 

 

I do think Editor Eicher's post has real merit and I hope it creates a rift within the original 2006 decision makers community to revisit and possibly overturn the controversial outcome.

(Although I wont hold my breath).

Pluto to many old timers is still a planet.

 

 

I see meteorites!

 

[Stellar1]

Yes that was short but some interesting angles were presented. One can argue the facts till kingdom come but one particular fact rings true with everyone, naming the planets in our solar system without ending with Pluto feels like you hit a roadblock. 

[mikeDnight]

Scientist's can identify Pluto as a chocolate cookie, but in the real world Pluto's a planet, and a fascinating one at that. 

[Lizardman]

Sure is! But again nothing is what it used to be

[edsmx5]

I'm just an old fart; Pluto will always be a planet to me ( reciting the planets names just doesn't sound right w/out Pluto at the end)

Judging by the hits this simple comment got, there's a lot of old farts here :-) ( who believe in Pluto) !

Edited by edsmx5, 04 January 2024 - 09:21 AM.

[Olimad]

Judging by the hits this simple comment got, there's a lot of old farts here :-) ( who believe in Pluto) !

 

 

I thought that Pluto was the dog of Mickey..........

[TOMDEY]

Pluto was demoted by one man, for personal and political reasons, not scientific. >>>

 

"Back in 1980 a British astronomer named Brian Marsden had famously told Clyde Tombaugh that Pluto wasn't a planet in his view, and that it would be his mission to erase Tombaugh's legacy by having Pluto reclassified as an asteroid. No one we've asked remembers why Marsden felt so strongly about this, but people did report that, for some reason, Marsden didn't like Tombaugh. Then, in a 2006 IAU meeting, a gaggle of astronomers led by Marsden procedurally objected to the IAU committee's newly proposed planet definition. Next followed a series of hastily drawn up amendments and definitions , all of which were voted down. But on the final day of the weeklong meeting, when most of the attendees had already left the meeting (only 4% of the IAU membership remained), those tired few still left in Prague voted on a newly proposed definition over the carefully considered one drafted by their own planet definition committee.

 

Unfortunately, the definition that they voted on was sloppy, awkward, and inelegant, and resulted in Pluto and all dwarf planets, along with all planets around other stars, being cast out. 'The hastily arranged voting process the IAU used that day has since nearly universally been regraded as flawed, and the definition it adopted is disliked by many astronomers, and even more so, by a wide cross section of planetary experts --- planetary scientists. ...

 

Adding direct insult to their flawed definition, a final stipulation added by Marsden's group at the end of the IAU's resolution was the vindictive and linguistically nonsensical statement 'A dwarf planet is not a planet.' With that, Marsden had accomplished his longstanding goal: Pluto would no longer be a planet in the eyes of astronomers, or in astronomy texts, and Clyde Tombaugh's pioneering legacy would essentially be erased."

 

Above excerpt from the book Chasing New Horizons pp. 171-172.   Tom

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 

[Olimad]

Pluto was demoted by one man, for personal and political reasons, not scientific. >>>

 

"Back in 1980 a British astronomer named Brian Marsden had famously told Clyde Tombaugh that Pluto wasn't a planet in his view, and that it would be his mission to erase Tombaugh's legacy by having Pluto reclassified as an asteroid. No one we've asked remembers why Marsden felt so strongly about this, but people did report that, for some reason, Marsden didn't like Tombaugh. Then, in a 2006 IAU meeting, a gaggle of astronomers led by Marsden procedurally objected to the IAU committee's newly proposed planet definition. Next followed a series of hastily drawn up amendments and definitions , all of which were voted down. But on the final day of the weeklong meeting, when most of the attendees had already left the meeting (only 4% of the IAU membership remained), those tired few still left in Prague voted on a newly proposed definition over the carefully considered one drafted by their own planet definition committee.

 

Unfortunately, the definition that they voted on was sloppy, awkward, and inelegant, and resulted in Pluto and all dwarf planets, along with all planets around other stars, being cast out. 'The hastily arranged voting process the IAU used that day has since nearly universally been regraded as flawed, and the definition it adopted is disliked by many astronomers, and even more so, by a wide cross section of planetary experts --- planetary scientists. ...

 

Adding direct insult to their flawed definition, a final stipulation added by Marsden's group at the end of the IAU's resolution was the vindictive and linguistically nonsensical statement 'A dwarf planet is not a planet.' With that, Marsden had accomplished his longstanding goal: Pluto would no longer be a planet in the eyes of astronomers, or in astronomy texts, and Clyde Tombaugh's pioneering legacy would essentially be erased."

 

Above excerpt from the book Chasing New Horizons pp. 171-172.   Tom

 

 

No, really??  there are personal animosities between scientists that mold the reality in function of their preferences?????? A bit like 0^0=1 ....

Human behaviors play an important role there too............

Edited by Olimad, 04 January 2024 - 09:59 AM.

[Dave Novoselsky]

I'm just an old fart; Pluto will always be a planet to me ( reciting the planets names just doesn't sound right w/out Pluto at the end)

As one old fart to another, Amen brother.

[moefuzz]

Pluto was demoted by one man, for personal and political reasons, not scientific. >>>

 

" when most of the attendees had already left the meeting (only 4% of the IAU membership remained), those tired few still left in Prague voted on a newly proposed definition over the carefully considered one drafted by their own planet definition committee.

 

."

 

Above excerpt from the book Chasing New Horizons pp. 171-172.   Tom

 

 

I recall reading about this some time after '06 and remember being hugely disappointed in that the vote was allowed to stand even though it represented such a small percentage of those who had attended.

 

 

[TOMDEY]

I recall reading about this some time after '06 and remember being hugely disappointed in that the vote was allowed to stand even though it represented such a small percentage of those who had attended.

Yeah... Marsden railroaded it through when no one was looking or there to object. I've worked among fellow scientists my entire career and can't help but notice that they are more flawed than the average bloke. We paint ourselves as somehow special, above, and immune from the usual human propensities, foibles, and shortcomings... but it's closer to charade than reality.    Tom

 

cha·rade
/SHəˈrād/
noun
an absurd pretense intended to create a pleasant or respectable appearance

[Dave Novoselsky]

Seeing the cover of the book shown above, I hopped over to my Kindle app to buy a copy.  Before I hit the ‘buy’ button I noticed yet another title by the same author on Pluto but with a $60+ price!  Wondering what would justify such an expensive upgrade I looked at the sample and bought it despite the price.

 

This book, “Beyond New Horizons” is a thorough tome compiled by the scientists behind the New Horizons mission that is everything you could ever want to know about not only Pluto, but the other objects in the “trans Neptunian“ Solar system, accompanied by drawings and photographs that are detailed beyond belief. While parts of it are incomprehensible to morons like me, it is something anyone in this hobby will appreciate, especially this forum.

 

Highly recommended if you want to scrape up the coin.

[Olimad]

Yeah... Marsden railroaded it through when no one was looking or there to object. I've worked among fellow scientists my entire career and can't help but notice that they are more flawed than the average bloke. We paint ourselves as somehow special, above, and immune from the usual human propensities, foibles, and shortcomings... but it's closer to charade than reality.    Tom

 

cha·rade
/SHəˈrād/
noun
an absurd pretense intended to create a pleasant or respectable appearance

 That is funny that in english charade has a negative meaning whereas in old french it is a "small talk, discussion" and a small word game guessing, which both have a positive, enjoyable stance. 

Depending where you are, you have the positive or negative meaning...

 

Maybe sometimes meanings are getting lost, or traductions are directed in a particular direction.... 

Edited by Olimad, 04 January 2024 - 11:02 AM.

[Skywatchr]

Judging by the hits this simple comment got, there's a lot of old farts here :-) ( who believe in Pluto) !

  Hey, watch what you say geezer.  I resemble that remark..  

[yuzameh]

Yes, Pluto's a planet and so is Eris and some others, else Mercury is a dwarf planet as is Ganymede and Titan and Triton (if Pluto's a planet, Triton is).  In fact it could be described as a dual planet.

 

Meanwhile Uranus is a cool class of spectral type Y brown dwarfs.

 

You can make what you want up.

 

Currently the IAU has made up a non-planet taxonomy for Pluto.

 

Despite much clever and good stuff done by Marsden over the years, him and Brown who just want's to be known as the first person in the USA to discover a new planet in the Solar System as far as I can see (with his planet 9/x drivel), decided to ditch it, probably having tried for years but of course not having any success until Tombaugh had actually dropped dead, and the guy was amazingly long lived which must've been irritating for them.

 

The more relevant argument is the distinction between exoplanets and substellar objects as most transiting "hot jupiters" are heavier than brown dwarfs.  Other arbitrary and lame defintions are used to make those explanets but truthfully most exoplanets are lumps of gas best described as brown subdwarfs, in fact Jupiter itself could be lumped into that as I believe it generates more energy than it absorbs from the Sun still within its atmosphere and although that is mostly due to gravity effects and temperature and pressure related phase changes due to said that's also the case with T dwarfs and some fainter L dwarfs which don't even occassionally burn deuterium.

[yuzameh]

Yeah... Marsden railroaded it through when no one was looking or there to object. I've worked among fellow scientists my entire career and can't help but notice that they are more flawed than the average bloke. We paint ourselves as somehow special, above, and immune from the usual human propensities, foibles, and shortcomings... but it's closer to charade than reality.    Tom

 

cha·rade
/SHəˈrād/
noun
an absurd pretense intended to create a pleasant or respectable appearance

Yep, similar happend with Sedna I think it was, or was it Eris?  Marsden and Brown were pals.  Marsden was well known for running a tight, if not hawkish, ship when it came to nomenclature for minor planets but Brown often got let off naming his discoveries in the press and then having those names accepted later.  In one case there was an argument as to whether Brown's team or a Spanish team had discovered one of these big TNOs first, which allegations that the Spaniards had naughtily accessed some pre-MPC report logs or something (not to look for the object and pretend to have found it but to retro-discover it in their data), which was never substantiated.  In the end the naming committee were split so the chairman, who normally didn't vote, cast the deciding vote.  It's all on record somewhere.

 

The chairman cast for Brown.  Marsden and Brown were pals.  Marsden was the chairman.  It's all on record somewhere or other.

 

Now, let us not just assume a stink, or an old boy network (remember, Marsden at core, no matter how many years he spent in USA, was a Brit, which in those days and still does means "Old Boy Network", often referred to here as bunch of old farts nowadays, whichever group we're talking about).

 

What should be noted was that Marsden should have either abstained or someone else should have taken his seat protemp, merely based on the basic principle of "potential of conflict of interest".  This doesn't mean people don't have the moral aptitude to avoid conflict of interest, but it is best when a conflict of interest is made impossible, irrespective of issues of trust or rigour or fairness.  That's why Franklin D in the USA wanted to expand the seats on the USA supreme court at one time as he knew that the nature of the selection process could lead as much to partisan viewpoint as it did to legal statute consideration.  He wanted the numbers large enough that the latter would sufficiently dilute the former.

 

Or, if easier for you, take a quote from the hitchhikers guide to the galaxies "spacetime was not only warped but thoroughly bent".  In the old meaning of the word bent...

 

Or, is Pluto a planet?  Who cares!  What's for dinner?

[musicengin]

The principal investigator for the New Horizons spacecraft, Alan Stern, has many things to say about Pluto being a planet, and they're all good science. There's a video from the 2021 Pluto Festival at the Lowell Observatory, that's fun and worth watching.

[rockethead26]

The good news is since that fateful day in 2006 when the room full of astronomers and not planetary scientists voted on the very poorly worded definition of a planet, the vast majority of planetary scientists in the world have simply ignored the ruling. Almost all peer reviewed research papers by planetary scientists that discuss Pluto refer to it as "planet Pluto". 

[Lizardman]

Pluto should be able to decide

[moefuzz]

It has an active atmosphere, has craters which suggest it is *possibly* clearing its path, and has at least 5 moons,

Sounds similiar to Earth other than Earth does not clear a path

and Yet Earth is a Planet?

 

 

 

Edited by moefuzz, 04 January 2024 - 08:37 PM.

[Skywatchr]

It has an active atmosphere, has craters which suggest it is *possibly* clearing its path, and has at least 5 moons,

Sounds similiar to Earth other than Earth does not clear a path

and Yet Earth is a Planet?

 

 

 

PIA21590_–_Blue_Rays,_New_Horizons'_High-Res_Farewell_to_Pluto.jpg

Earth already cleared it's path long ago.   Pluto is in the process of it because there are still plenty of smaller bodies floating around at it's distance, and beyond.  It's still "collecting samples".