http://www.tenthplanet.info/2006/08/24/xena-is-a-dwarf-planet/ Chronicling the discovery of the tenth planet Wed, 15 Dec 2010 22:05:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 http://www.tenthplanet.info/2006/08/24/xena-is-a-dwarf-planet/comment-page-1/#comment-17786 Jennifer Mon, 06 Sep 2010 02:42:07 +0000 http://www.tenthplanet.info/2006/08/24/xena-is-a-dwarf-planet/#comment-17786 look, i believe this PLANET X is heading our way here in usa we can see soemthing large in our skys and it says on some sites its coming is this true or flase? look, i believe this PLANET X is heading our way here in usa we can see soemthing large in our skys and it says on some sites its coming is this true or flase?

]]> http://www.tenthplanet.info/2006/08/24/xena-is-a-dwarf-planet/comment-page-1/#comment-16781 Laurel Kornfeld Fri, 16 Jul 2010 04:53:53 +0000 http://www.tenthplanet.info/2006/08/24/xena-is-a-dwarf-planet/#comment-16781 It's not over. Pluto and Eris are planets, as are Ceres, Haumea, Makemake, and many others in our solar system, provided they orbit the sun and are large enough to be rounded by their own gravity. Only four percent of the IAU voted on the controversial demotion, and most are not planetary scientists. Their decision was immediately opposed in a formal petition by hundreds of professional astronomers led by Dr. Alan Stern, Principal Investigator of NASA’s New Horizons mission to Pluto. One reason the IAU definition makes no sense is it says dwarf planets are not planets at all! That is like saying a grizzly bear is not a bear, and it is inconsistent with the use of the term “dwarf” in astronomy, where dwarf stars are still stars, and dwarf galaxies are still galaxies. Also, the IAU definition classifies objects solely by where they are while ignoring what they are. If Earth were in Pluto’s orbit, according to the IAU definition, it would not be a planet either. A definition that takes the same object and makes it a planet in one location and not a planet in another is essentially useless. Pluto is a planet because it is spherical, meaning it is large enough to be pulled into a round shape by its own gravity--a state known as hydrostatic equilibrium and characteristic of planets, not of shapeless asteroids held together by chemical bonds. These reasons are why many astronomers, lay people, and educators are either ignoring the demotion entirely or working to get it overturned. It’s not over. Pluto and Eris are planets, as are Ceres, Haumea, Makemake, and many others in our solar system, provided they orbit the sun and are large enough to be rounded by their own gravity. Only four percent of the IAU voted on the controversial demotion, and most are not planetary scientists. Their decision was immediately opposed in a formal petition by hundreds of professional astronomers led by Dr. Alan Stern, Principal Investigator of NASA’s New Horizons mission to Pluto. One reason the IAU definition makes no sense is it says dwarf planets are not planets at all! That is like saying a grizzly bear is not a bear, and it is inconsistent with the use of the term “dwarf” in astronomy, where dwarf stars are still stars, and dwarf galaxies are still galaxies. Also, the IAU definition classifies objects solely by where they are while ignoring what they are. If Earth were in Pluto’s orbit, according to the IAU definition, it would not be a planet either. A definition that takes the same object and makes it a planet in one location and not a planet in another is essentially useless. Pluto is a planet because it is spherical, meaning it is large enough to be pulled into a round shape by its own gravity–a state known as hydrostatic equilibrium and characteristic of planets, not of shapeless asteroids held together by chemical bonds. These reasons are why many astronomers, lay people, and educators are either ignoring the demotion entirely or working to get it overturned.

]]>