10th planet discovered

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=247&topic_id=1929&mesg_id=1929

See my post under skepticism, science and psuedoscience. This is for real.

There's probably hundreds of the things.

I doubt they'll ever call it a tenth planet.

Sky and Telescope is calling it a tenth planet because of its size.

That's still undetermined.

Sky and Telescope is in the money making business.

If it's twice as big in diameter that's 8x the mass. At twice the distance from the Sun? Isn't that inconsistent with the volume distribution of solar system objects?

There's quite a bit of mass in the Kuiper belt. Further, the existance of objects bigger than Pluto but further away has been theorized for some time. Being far away, however, it is about 18th magnitude (Pluto is 14th at opposition) and hard to see.

Obviously direct evidence that something exists trumps any distribution theory like Bode's Law.

We have no idea of the mass of the object, only a minimum volume based on luminosity. We don't know what its denisty is. Even if 8x as massive as Pluto, it's still pretty light.

This 10th planet thing has been going on for years along with the argument of whether Pluto is really a planet.

No it hasn't. People have guessed that there were more planets, but this time it has been photographed. It ain't a mirage.

Minor planets are discovered all the time and they change the model of the solar system. The argument over Pluto is semantics only. Basically, what is the definition of a planet and does Pluto fit that definition. No one doubts it exists.

no one said Pluto does not exist and no one questioned whether the "10th Planet" exists. The debate over what is and is not a planet and how to classify Pluto is one that has been at the forefront of astronomy for the past few years.

Let's go to NASA on this one:

"Pluto has been known as the ninth planet of our solar system since it was discovered by Clyde Tombaugh at Lowell Observatory in 1930. On the other hand, it has been clear for decades that Pluto does not fit in with the pattern of the other planets. Over the last few years, the accumulated information on Pluto and the discovery of an increasing number of other objects in the outer solar system with orbital characteristics very similar to those of Pluto have been discussed within the community of astronomers called "minor-planet researchers". The question of the official status of Pluto has recently come to the forefront because the orbits of some of these other objects are now sufficiently well determined that it is reasonable to begin including them in the catalog of orbits of what are now generically known as "Trans-Neptunian Objects" (TNOs)."

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/pluto.html

Evidence of Intelligent Design?

I love a good Buckaroo Banzai quote.

there you are". My all time personal favorite.

is that one of the sources claimed that the planet is sometimes closer to the sun than Pluto.

I remember it well..because I wrote a poem about it. In about 1999?

Same one?

Other large objects have been found out beyond Pluto, and the question is not whether or not to call them planets, but whether or not to demote Pluto from planet to proto-planet (or some other non-planet designation).



"Researchers say that as larger Kuiper Belt objects turn up, the case for regarding Pluto as a fully fledged planet weakens.

Pluto lies within the Kuiper Belt and is considered by many to be merely among the largest of the bunch, and not a planet in its own right."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2306945.stm


"How many planets are in the solar system? Everyone knows that there are nine planets – right? Well, that depends. This past year astronomers uncovered Sedna, a planet-like body orbiting our sun on a course that places it up to 93 billion miles away from the sun! Scientists are still unsure of the classification of Sedna. Although it has planet-like features, it has a comet-like orbit. (Other similarities noted on Pluto, cast doubt on Pluto’s classification as a planet.)"
http://www.discover.com/educators-guide/jan-05/guide2/


Still pretty cool though.

Under the current definition which puts the lower limit for planetary status at the size of Pluto, it's a planet.

One definition is that a planet has to be large enough so that gravity makes it "round" (as opposed to lumpy like asteroids).
Others are that it has to be in the planetary plane (which rules out Pluto, and this one). There are as many definitions of planet as there are astronomers. Seeing as there are arguments about whether or not Pluto is really a planet, they will never call this one a planet, based on it's orbital plane and distance from the sun.

There is still a broad range of possible sizes for the object, the lower end of which is smaller than Pluto. There was a DU thread on this earlier today referencing a BBC Science article.

On edit: My bad. It looks like this is a separate find. The earlier report was on 2003 EL61. Now, what are the chances of two announcements like this on the same day? What a solar system...!

they still probably won't call it a planet.

Then they'd have to call all of those objects bigger than Pluto a planet. Which is exactly why they're considering dropping Pluto as a planet.

... are as big as the admittedly small Pluto. It is always possible that the Internat. Astro. Union will adjust the definition upward to exclude Pluto. It is an odd-ball among major planets, though it is beginning to look like a typical outer-solar system object.

It's believe that there could be hundreds, that's what I'm saying. They aren't going to be calling this a planet because there could be hundreds more just like it.

Pluto was named a planet when we thought it was bigger than it is. Turns out a third of it is its moon Charon. Now the definition seems to be fixed at Pluto's size simply to avoid changing its status. Plus, for a long time, the Kuiper belt was not known, so astronomers assumed Pluto was the only thing out there.

is that they'll still call Pluto a planet, and these things "objects" even if they're larger than Pluto.

Nevertheless, whether they call it a planet or not, the people who found it are to be commended.

Scientists should be treated like rock stars IMO.

... will you kindly know something about astronomy first.

:mad:

that you've jumped the gun?

Don't expect astronomers to start calling this the 10th planet any time soon.

Rapture Fundies. They won't need NASA because they will be transported by a Star Trek beam.

They're finding planets orbiting other stars left and right now-a-days, but we still haven't found all the planets in our own solar system yet. :crazy:

should we find anything bigger than pluto in the asteroid belt and name those as planets?

the only reason Pluto is a planet is because it was labeled a planet a "long" time ago. I doubt this new object will ever be labeled a planet.

...depending on how reflective it is. So, if it turns out to be smaller than Pluto, it is not a major planet. If it's bigger, it is, unless they redefine how big a planet needs to be. So my apologies if it turns out not to be. Still, the object is real, big, previously undiscovered and does not contradict any scientific understanding of how the solar system is.

I've always been fascinated by astronomy, though I have only an amateur's familiarity. Astronomy really has been exploding in the last decade or so. So many discoveries.

I remember when Voyager 1 passed Saturn and my science teacher was complaining that NASA can get pictures from Saturn, but he cannot get UHF on his TV.

Someone wrote:
"This Is Gonna REALLY Screw Up Astrology Charts!!"

Nah, those wacky astrologers (yes, astrologers, not astronomers) have been predicting the discovery a tenth planet for a long time and have referred to it as ... Vulcan. (I kid you not.)

Live long and prosper, DUdes! :)

... for something made of ice (probably).

Oh yeah, Vulcan's the one that's supposed to be hiding even closer to the sun than Mercury. I believe it was blamed for the precession of Mercury's orbit until Einstein came along and explained how relativity would do that.

Welcome to DU!

It's hard to say which of these are planets and which aren't, wouldn't you agree? I think it's entirely arbitrary where we draw the line, but it's good for a debate.