![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
redneckgaijinThis is in response to ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
starcat_jewel and others who wonder why people like me are anything from irritated to furious at Pluto's reclassification, or rather declassification.
There are two reasons why I'm miffed.
First, the term "dwarf planet" is a copout. By the definition adopted by the International Astronomical Society the other day, Pluto is not a planet. Calling it a dwarf planet is like giving a certificate of attendance to those nineteen-year-olds who sat in their desks at school and didn't learn a damn thing and didn't earn their diplomas- it allowed them to pretend they were graduating along with everyone else. "Dwarf planet" allows astronomers to say, "Oh, Pluto's still a planet, it's just not a MAJOR planet."
People, if Pluto's not a planet or a moon, then it's either an ASTEROID or a COMET. We already have names for things smaller than planets. (And remember, the term "asteroid," or "starlike" was a term invented to disqualify Ceres and three other bodies from being planets.) -Call- it an asteroid or a comet- most likely a comet, given its icy composition. And if it's too big or in too regular an orbit to be a comet... golly gee whiz... do you think it might just be a PLANET?
Second, the choice the IAS had was either to disqualify Pluto or add new planets to the list. In my opinion, Ceres and "Xena" should DEFINITELY be planets. However, the IAS looked at the Kuiper Belt and points beyond, seeing the probability of more Pluto-sized objects being discovered in the next decade, and decided against it.
Astronomers decided they DIDN'T want to discover any more new planets. Eight is enough, they said.
Let me repeat: scientists in a field of study almost defined by the discovery of new things didn't want to discover any more new planets.
Instead they decided to chuck Pluto into the "dwarf planet" bracket, at the bottom of the "Tiny and Unimportant Space Objects" dumpster, along with over 100,000 asteroids and its two already named co-dwarfs, Ceres and "Xena".
Imagination? Inspiration? An astronomer craves not these things. Aside from the eight major planets, one rock's as good as another.
All of which makes me wonder; if Neptune had an elliptical, inclined orbit that crossed that of Uranus, would it be called a dwarf planet?
starcat_jewel and others who wonder why people like me are anything from irritated to furious at Pluto's reclassification, or rather declassification.There are two reasons why I'm miffed.
First, the term "dwarf planet" is a copout. By the definition adopted by the International Astronomical Society the other day, Pluto is not a planet. Calling it a dwarf planet is like giving a certificate of attendance to those nineteen-year-olds who sat in their desks at school and didn't learn a damn thing and didn't earn their diplomas- it allowed them to pretend they were graduating along with everyone else. "Dwarf planet" allows astronomers to say, "Oh, Pluto's still a planet, it's just not a MAJOR planet."
People, if Pluto's not a planet or a moon, then it's either an ASTEROID or a COMET. We already have names for things smaller than planets. (And remember, the term "asteroid," or "starlike" was a term invented to disqualify Ceres and three other bodies from being planets.) -Call- it an asteroid or a comet- most likely a comet, given its icy composition. And if it's too big or in too regular an orbit to be a comet... golly gee whiz... do you think it might just be a PLANET?
Second, the choice the IAS had was either to disqualify Pluto or add new planets to the list. In my opinion, Ceres and "Xena" should DEFINITELY be planets. However, the IAS looked at the Kuiper Belt and points beyond, seeing the probability of more Pluto-sized objects being discovered in the next decade, and decided against it.
Astronomers decided they DIDN'T want to discover any more new planets. Eight is enough, they said.
Let me repeat: scientists in a field of study almost defined by the discovery of new things didn't want to discover any more new planets.
Instead they decided to chuck Pluto into the "dwarf planet" bracket, at the bottom of the "Tiny and Unimportant Space Objects" dumpster, along with over 100,000 asteroids and its two already named co-dwarfs, Ceres and "Xena".
Imagination? Inspiration? An astronomer craves not these things. Aside from the eight major planets, one rock's as good as another.
All of which makes me wonder; if Neptune had an elliptical, inclined orbit that crossed that of Uranus, would it be called a dwarf planet?
