Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22

Thread: 12 Planets?

  1. #1
    Senior Member latenight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    The Reflecting God
    Posts
    4,100
    Whatever doesn't kill you, is gonna leave a scar...

  2. #2
    Senior Member sabreur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Heidelberg, GE
    Posts
    5,862
    Blog Entries
    153
    Oh man, this is so going to screw up my astrology chart...
    Why sabre? Because you don't take heads with the point.

  3. #3
    Posting Hound oiuyt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Pennsauken, NJ
    Posts
    12,588
    Worse (if making planetary charts outdated is bad -- or even just nursery-room solar system mobiles) is if that definition gets approved there will relatively soon be dozens more planets.

    -B
    "Oh but you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you!"

  4. #4
    Senior Member gtmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,758
    I can hear the 5th dimension now...

    "When Ceres is in the 7th house and Charon aligns with 2003UB313"

    How trippingly it rolls off the tongue.
    Fencing T-shirts available at Off-The-Piste Wear
    **New designs** including f.net themed designs for easy recognition of fellow f.netters at tournaments!

  5. #5
    Senior Member IHateMrPotatohead's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    2,120
    Ack!

    It won't be: "My Very Educated Mother Just Served Us Nine Pizzas"

    Anymore!!!!!!


    How am I gonna remember Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Ceres, Jupiter....
    Quote Originally Posted by IHateMrPotatohead
    I can't think of anything to put down there!

  6. #6
    ಠ_ಠ
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,975
    Blog Entries
    25
    misleading. pluto is being relabeled as a "pluton", not a planet. the other celestial bodies will also be classified as "plutons". we will have 8 planets and 4 plutons.
    Last edited by noodle; 08-16-2006 at 03:16 PM.

  7. #7
    Senior Member gtmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,758
    Quote Originally Posted by IHateMrPotatohead
    Ack!

    It won't be: "My Very Educated Mother Just Served Us Nine Pizzas"

    Anymore!!!!!!


    How am I gonna remember Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Ceres, Jupiter....
    You could always try:

    My Very Educated Mother Couldn't Just Shut Up N' Passively Comply (in) 2003, Useless B****!
    Fencing T-shirts available at Off-The-Piste Wear
    **New designs** including f.net themed designs for easy recognition of fellow f.netters at tournaments!

  8. #8
    Senior Member gtmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,758
    Quote Originally Posted by noodle
    misleading. pluto is being relabeled as a "pluton", not a planet. the other celestial bodies will also be classified as "plutons". we will have 7 planets and 4 plutons.
    Actually given the description I think it works like this. All plutons are planets, but not all planets are plutons.
    Fencing T-shirts available at Off-The-Piste Wear
    **New designs** including f.net themed designs for easy recognition of fellow f.netters at tournaments!

  9. #9
    Senior Member latenight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    The Reflecting God
    Posts
    4,100
    Quote Originally Posted by gtmac
    Actually given the description I think it works like this. All plutons are planets, but not all planets are plutons.

    That is correct per the proposed definitions
    Last edited by latenight; 08-16-2006 at 02:26 PM.
    Whatever doesn't kill you, is gonna leave a scar...

  10. #10
    Senior Member IHateMrPotatohead's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    2,120
    Quote Originally Posted by gtmac
    Actually given the description I think it works like this. All plutons are planets, but not all planets are plutons.


    Oh! Ot's just like squares and rectangles in Geometry! Yay!
    Quote Originally Posted by IHateMrPotatohead
    I can't think of anything to put down there!

  11. #11
    ಠ_ಠ
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    5,975
    Blog Entries
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by gtmac
    Actually given the description I think it works like this. All plutons are planets, but not all planets are plutons.
    according to the definition of binary stars, they are also both planets, but we still use the most specific identifier. these new planets have been picked up and are intended to be referred to as plutons, not planets.

  12. #12
    Senior Member sabreur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Heidelberg, GE
    Posts
    5,862
    Blog Entries
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by noodle
    misleading. pluto is being relabeled as a "pluton", not a planet. the other celestial bodies will also be classified as "plutons". we will have 7 planets and 4 plutons.
    Eight planets.

    Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune.
    Why sabre? Because you don't take heads with the point.

  13. #13
    Armorer DHCJr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Long Beach, CA / Las Vegas
    Posts
    4,822
    Here is the definition.

    "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."

    One of the 12 planets proposed is Charon the moon of Pluto.

    If Pluto is classified as a planet, then how can a Charon, since it is a satellite of a planet?

    They also talk of 53 planets, if this passes.
    Donald Hollis Clinton, Jr.
    DHCJr@juno.com

    To Teach is to Learn (Japanese Proverb)

    Knowing the rule book by heart means nothing, if you don't understand the rules.

  14. #14
    Senior Member latenight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    The Reflecting God
    Posts
    4,100
    Quote Originally Posted by DHCJr
    Here is the definition.

    "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."

    One of the 12 planets proposed is Charon the moon of Pluto.

    If Pluto is classified as a planet, then how can a Charon, since it is a satellite of a planet?

    They also talk of 53 planets, if this passes.

    "A pair of round objects that orbit around a point in space that is outside both objects meaning the center of gravity (or barycenter) is between the two planets in space as with Pluto and Charon would be called double planets"
    Whatever doesn't kill you, is gonna leave a scar...

  15. #15
    Senior Member umbrella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    the milky way
    Posts
    229

    Interplanetary Fellows

    I agree in totality. The 5th Dimension is great, but alas gone......UP UP AND AWAY.....is one of my favorite songs.......


    I find it misleading as well, and a dissapointment that our "scientists" spent a few Billion dollars to call an asteroid a planet, while there's mass confusion on the Third Rock from the Sun.

  16. #16
    Senior Member fencingfrog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    my fencing club
    Posts
    880
    its flippin' retarded.

    just admit that pluto shouldn't be a planet, and leave us with the 8 original planets!!! back in 1930 or whatever it was they messed up. admit it, and we wont have 2 bazillion plutons/planet like rocks.

    xena is a cool name though.
    Fencing: Violence is a way of life!!

    The Easter bunny is unstoppable!!

  17. #17
    Posting Hound oiuyt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Pennsauken, NJ
    Posts
    12,588
    Quote Originally Posted by fencingfrog
    the 8 original planets!!!
    ???

    Neptune was discovered not quite 160 years ago, how can it be "original"? Ceres was a planet for nearly 50 years (starting in 1801) before being demoted. It had already lost its status before Neptune was discovered. Pallas, Juno, and Vesta similarly were considered planets during this time. Once other objects started being found in the Asteroid Belt in 1845 they were all demoted.

    That said, there is a naming convention being floated of "Classical Planets" meaning those discovered and considered planets as of 1900 (so not including Ceres, et al). It matches what you're apparently referring to as "original" planets.

    -B
    "Oh but you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you!"

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    8,588
    Quote Originally Posted by fencingfrog
    its flippin' retarded.

    just admit that pluto shouldn't be a planet, and leave us with the 8 original planets!!! back in 1930 or whatever it was they messed up. admit it, and we wont have 2 bazillion plutons/planet like rocks.

    xena is a cool name though.
    My Very Educated Mother Just Said "Uh-oh! No Pluto!"

    -Colbert Report

  19. #19
    Armorer DHCJr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Long Beach, CA / Las Vegas
    Posts
    4,822
    Quote Originally Posted by latenight
    "A pair of round objects that orbit around a point in space that is outside both objects meaning the center of gravity (or barycenter) is between the two planets in space as with Pluto and Charon would be called double planets"
    Because of the definition above in a few (billion) years, the term '3rd Rock from the Sun' will be confusing. Which planet are we talking about? Since the Moon is moving away from the Earth, the center of gravity is moving out and will eventually be outside of the Earth making the Moon a planet.

    I'm glad I took Astronomy when there was only 9 planets. Try memorizing 12, 54, 100 or whatever.

    Does anyone remember the little saying to help memorize the names of the planets?
    Donald Hollis Clinton, Jr.
    DHCJr@juno.com

    To Teach is to Learn (Japanese Proverb)

    Knowing the rule book by heart means nothing, if you don't understand the rules.

  20. #20
    arc
    arc is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Lubbock, Texas
    Posts
    286
    From what I've seen in the news, there's been a bit of a revolt at the IAU meeting, with a number of astronomers rejecting the proposed definition ...

    To me, the whole thing is a bit ridiculous, particularly the role that scientists are giving to PR in determining a systematic nomenclature; in a way, it kind of reminds me of aluminum vs. aluminium. The point is to be able to communicate in an effective fashion ... and the proposed definition, while being rigorous enough to communicate some effective information with the label 'planet,' is also so overbroad that it fails to convey important information that could be included by some of the alternative systematic definitions ... *shrug*

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26