Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Since it was stripped of planetary status, Pluto’s defenders have been fighting

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 255 posts

Re: Since it was stripped of planetary status, Pluto’s defenders have been fighting

#121

Post by Dylan16807 »

nephihaha wrote: post #116
pdonis wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since the Moon's orbit is always concave towards the Sun, one could even argue that the Moon is a planet, not a satellite, it just happens to have an orbit that is closely coupled to that of another planet, Earth. As I understand it, in fact, there was discussion about defining systems like Earth-Moon as double planets, but that didn't make it into the final definition.

I have heard people argue that we are in fact in a kind of binary planetary system. No other planet has such a large satellite relative to its size, until you get to the likes of Pluto etc.

The Earth is closer but I don't think there's any good argument to say it's actually a binary system. Notably the Earth-Moon barycenter stays inside the Earth, and the Sun-Jupiter barycenter doesn't stay inside the Sun. But barycenters are too easy to get outside of objects anyway.

Re: Since it was stripped of planetary status, Pluto’s defenders have been fighting

#122

Post by [deleted] »

autoexec wrote: post #108
jerf wrote: post #19

You know, this is really just a fantastic opportunity to realize the phenomenal psychological power of "headcanon". Who cares if Pluto is or is not tagged with the word "planet" by some organization you know effectively nothing about, have no control over, has no control over you, and couldn't so much as move a pebble on the planetary body in question any time in the next 20 years, if not more? Have whatever emotiona…

I agree, call whatever you like whatever you want. Just don't expect schools to teach that to anyone else. We get enough of that from the folks who want to replace science class with "God did it".

[deleted]

Re: Since it was stripped of planetary status, Pluto’s defenders have been fighting

#123

Post by ChrisClark »

hn_submit wrote: post #33
nemomarx wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How to keep Pluto as a planet but say larger objects than it that also orbit the sun aren't planets, is the question I guess?

It's basically a question of definition: we define Pluto as a planet and the others as Kuiper Belt Objects (KBO) As human beings we're allowed to make these kind of decisions. We define ourselves to be outside of the animal kingdom when we're clearly part of it and a type of animal ourselves.

But why? There is no reason to care about the classification of Pluto. Why don't you just define that you're okay with it not being a planet?

Re: Since it was stripped of planetary status, Pluto’s defenders have been fighting

#124

Post by ummonk »

zdragnar wrote: post #77
bryanlarsen wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The alternative was to announce "we now have 10 more planets, and there are probably a bunch more, and we'll probably never really get a definitive number". That would also have had an impact on the public view of science. Perhaps not as bad, but it would have had an impact.

No, the alternative would be to make up some latin sounding words for planets, dwarf planets, etc. and leave the vulgar planet alone to the standard 9 that we all know are planets.

No that would be an argument to return to the original definition of planets (highly visible celestial objects that migrate across the sky, i.e. the Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn).

If you believe in the "standard 9" you're just insisting on returning to a scientific definition of planets but one that is frozen on our scientific understanding from a few decades ago...

Re: Since it was stripped of planetary status, Pluto’s defenders have been fighting

#125

Post by pavlov »

adrian_b wrote: post #17

> “One of the biggest flaws with the IAU definition is that you can have the same object in two different orbits,” says Kornfeld. “In one, it’s considered a planet, and in the other, it’s not considered a planet.” No, there is no flaw in this, and moreover there is nothing new in this. This is how it has always been, it is not something invented recently. In the Solar System, there are 3 Mercury-sized satellites and…

There’s the Vulcan planet classification system where Earth is a Class M world, but I guess that won’t be adopted until 2154.

Re: Since it was stripped of planetary status, Pluto’s defenders have been fighting

#126

Post by odyssey7 »

ummonk wrote: post #124
zdragnar wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the alternative would be to make up some latin sounding words for planets, dwarf planets, etc. and leave the vulgar planet alone to the standard 9 that we all know are planets.

No that would be an argument to return to the original definition of planets (highly visible celestial objects that migrate across the sky, i.e. the Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn). If you believe in the "standard 9" you're just insisting on returning to a scientific definition of planets but one that is frozen on our scientific understanding from a few decades ago...

As you can see, there are many valid ways to go about understanding what a planet is in a cultural sense.

Re: Since it was stripped of planetary status, Pluto’s defenders have been fighting

#128

Post by p-e-w »

nephihaha wrote: post #117
lloda wrote: post #80

Pluto was only discovered in the 1930s. The only cultural heritage of Pluto as a ‘planet’ is a few decades of science schoolbooks, but going by these comments you'd think it's been in the same list as Jupiter since the Babylonians.

Uranus and Neptune don't have a long human heritage either. Neither appears to have been known to the Babylonians.

Uranus has been observed since antiquity, but wasn’t recognized as a planet.

Re: Since it was stripped of planetary status, Pluto’s defenders have been fighting

#129

Post by odyssey7 »

wat10000 wrote: post #92
odyssey7 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> someone was trying to make a name for themselves 100% Scientists try to coin new terms all the time. It’s great for the researcher if people actually use it. But why do that when you can just sign your name on a term everyone already uses? Redefining “planet,” from the 9 culturally accepted symbols into something else, was a swindle. “Things that clear their orbits” could have been TTCTOs. It happens all the time,…

A swindle, really? Who got cheated out of money?

The asset lost in this in this case is from the commons. That is, the ability to say "the ninth planet" or "the planet Pluto" without incurring smug harassment from legions who probably couldn't explain what the IAU is.

Re: Since it was stripped of planetary status, Pluto’s defenders have been fighting

#130

Post by lokar »

Gooblebrai wrote: post #104
zdragnar wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Peanuts, cashews, almonds, walnuts, pecans, Brazil nuts and pistachios are culinary nuts but NOT botanical nuts. Botanical berries: Bananas, tomatoes, grapes, cucumbers, eggplants, avocados and peppers, but NOT strawberries, raspberries, blackberries or mulberries. Scientists really should have made up their own categories instead of using our words.

> Scientists really should have made up their own categories instead of using our words. Doesn't really matter. The public would end up taking science words for their own purposes to sound legitimate. Look at how "quantum" and "energy" is used in alternative medicine.

They really are the “epicenter” of the problem
Post reply on HN