Baseball Toaster was unplugged on February 4, 2009.
Email me at btimmermann@gmail.com
Select a date:
The International Astronomical Union, meeting in Prague, has decided to keep Pluto as a planet.
For the time being. The general membership could change the decision.
To be a planet, IAU says:
Q: What is the exact wording of the official IAU proposed definition of "planet" in "Resolution 5 for GA-XXVI"?A:
"A planet is a celestial body that (a) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (b) is in orbit around a star, and is neither a star nor a satellite of a planet."
In addition to Pluto, three other objects have now been upgraded to planetarty status: Ceres, an asteroid between Mars and Jupiter; Charon, a moon of Pluto; and UB313, which is nicknamed "Xena", but will now get a more fitting name.
Charon qualifies as a planet because its center of gravity is between it and Pluto. The Earth's moon has its center of gravity inside the Earth.
Please debate this politely.
IAU press release explaining the proposal more completely.
First -- has this been adopted? The last I read, it was a proposal, but maybe things changed this morning.
Points 1 and 2 are redundant. Size is what makes objects round; a body's own gravity will pull in the edges. That said, it's just easier to tell how big something is than if it's round or not. The 800 km rule is about how big scientists think a body has to be before its own gravity makes it round.
The scientists who wrote the rule decided to use gravity as the determining factor in what makes a planet. That's fine, I guess, but it opens the door for dozens of objects. To me -- and granted, my vote counts for zero -- size should also be a determining factor. And elliptical orbits...
Things get nutty when we start talking about planets outside our solar system. The rule is going to have to change again -- there are planets that do not orbit anything, and other objects that are currently classified as planets but are really brown dwarf stars. I don't really understand all the details -- but it seems to me that if you're going to make a rule, it's best to make one that works for the very largest planets as well as the very smallest.
I will put in a link to the press release.
http://www.ci.ceres.ca.us/
Right now its:
My very eager mother just served us nine pizzas. (or something similar)
Looks like we're going to have to insert two C words and hopefully the other planet isn't UB313 or Xena, as it would make mnemonic reconstruction difficult
The notes in the spaces and on the lines of the bass and treble clef, now that's where mnemonics come in handy, but the planets?
Anyway, just insert "could" in that sentence.
My Very Eager Mother Could Just Serve Us Nine (Crusty) Pizzas. Of course the order of the last three depends on the time.
The Earth is a host planet to the moon. Pluto and Charon are roughly of equal size -- as both pointed out, the center of mass that the two objects orbit around is not inside either planet. Therefore, they qualify as a double planet.
I'm pretty sure (but could be very, very wrong) that there are some very large objects outside our solar system that are double planets. Would you say they aren't planets?
What's more, according to the wife, there are some planet-like objects that don't orbit anything. Are they not planets?
Approved!
Approved and then modified to make it sound meaningless!
As for the double-planet thing, I'm cool with that, but the new version of #3 above sounded like it was designed to rule out Charon (you meant Charon, not Ceres). But what you said in 14 confirms my assumptions in 11 and 13 that either both Pluto and Charon are planets (preferably referred to together as a double or binary planet) or neither of them are.
or
My Very Eager Mother Could Just Serve Us Nothing?
I'm about to tread dangerously outside my breadth of knowledge, but bear with me:
Planet-like objects that don't orbit anything happen like this: they were orbiting a star when another star came along and pulled the object out of orbit.
Would you say that the object was a planet when it was orbiting its star and ceased to be a planet when pulled out of orbit? What do you call the new object?
Ultimately, I'm with you. I think there are eight planets in our solar system. At the same time, my wife brought up issues that make it pretty clear to me that people who know more than I do think this isn't as cut-and-dried as I'd like it to be. I like thinking about this stuff, but quickly, I get into areas that I don't understand.
Drink plenty of fluids.
I'm not sure what terms exist for objects not in orbit, however.
I just have to accept it and move on.
Mercury - small, hot leadoff hitter
Venus - a bad version of the #3 hitter
Earth - the best player on the team
Mars - God of War clean-up
Jupiter - the biggest bopper fifth, but lacks the solid surface to hit fourth
Saturn - Lesser version of #5
Uranis, Neptune - none descript 7 & 8 hitters
Pluto - the small pathetic one, that in the NL isn't even an every day planet
The man is obviously a genius. And yes, I'm that one guy that watches MSNBC.
24 28 Since the term "Planet" means "Traveler", representing how the planets didn't seem to hold a fixed position like other stars, I'm assuming that a large, round, mass without a traceable orbit doesn't technically qualify as a "Planet", but you've already covered that, seemingly. So, cool.
vr, Xei
http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/007874.html#007874
Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.