Fresh Fuel for Argument by Astronomers Over Pluto’s Status as a Planet
IAU President Ron Ekers explains the rationale behind a planet definition: “Modern science provides much more knowledge than the simple fact that objects orbiting the Sun appear to move with respect to the background of fixed stars. For example, recent new discoveries have been made of objects in the outer regions of our Solar System that have sizes comparable to and larger than Pluto. These discoveries have rightfully called into question whether or not they should be considered as new ‘planets.’ “
(from the IAU meeting on Aug 16, 2006 in Prague)
********************************************************************************
Presently the ongoing argument between scientists and astronomers is in reference to Pluto being denounced to its lower status as compared to its major role in our solar system. Not just a little argument, mind you, but a full “Great Planet Debate” was held last Thursday on August 12, 2008 at the John Hopkins University’s Applied Physics Laboratory—which unknown to many—is the base of science operations for NASA’s New Horizons mission to Pluto among others in the solar system’s outer regions, according to the New Scientist article, “Join the Planet Debate”.
It all started two years ago on August 14-25, 2006 under the quite professional auspices of the International Astronomical Union (IAU), which had concluded two full years of working on “defining the difference between planets and the smaller solar system bodies—comets and asteroids”. This is where Pluto steps in. “IF” the IAU General Assembly had defined what a planet was differently than they had, we would have 12 plus planets in our Solar System (listed as Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Ceres, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto, Charon and 2003 UB313 ), listed as eight classical planets, three planets in a row and growing category of plutons (Pluto like objects) and Ceres. Pluto would have remained a planet, a prototype for what will be categorized as “plutons”. But it did not go that way, as Pluto was lowered to a lower-status planet.
But as we all know, it did not go that way as Pluto was lowered to a minor planet status of comets and asteroids, officially now known as minor planet “134340 Pluto”. At least according to the new designation by the International Astronomical Union’s Minor Planet Center. Immediately, astronomers and planetary scientists went to bat, and are still doing so, including NASA’s Alan Stern who resigned the early part of this year from NASA. When the IAU recently designated Pluto and its cousin Eris as plutoids instead of the lowly dwarf planet, Stern simply said, “It sounds like ‘haemorrhoids’. ” Stern also feels that planetary scientists were left out of the IAU’s decision-making, but this apparently does not nor did mean anything. The IAU General Secretary Karel van der Hucht is quoted as saying, “The IAU has done what it could to come forward with a working definition. In the meantime, it’s a free world, anybody may organize meetings on the subject.” Period. And so they have done so.
This entry was posted on Sunday, August 17th, 2008 at 2:59 am and is filed under Mission History, Space Agency News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
