| Author |
Message |
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
 Wed Feb 01, 2006 8:18 pm 'Tenth Planet' Bigger Than Pluto |
|
| Quote: | 'Tenth Planet' Bigger Than Pluto
LOS ANGELES � It's official � the so-called "10th planet" discovered last year is bigger than Pluto.
However, that may not mean much, since astronomers can't agree on exactly what a planet is, or even if Pluto itself qualifies as one.
The discoverers of the "planet," a Kuiper Belt object semi-officially known as 2003 UB313, gave only a rough estimate of its size, based on its brightness, when they reported their findings in July 2005.
That team � Michael Brown and Chad Trujillo of the California Institute of Technology and David Rabinowitz of Yale University � found the object, and its moon, by analyzing photographs taken by a telescope at the Mount Palomar Observatory in California in 2003.
A German group of researchers has now used a different form of analysis to more accurately gauge 2003 UB313's diameter.
By measuring how much heat the planetoid radiates, the scientists led by Frank Bertoldi of the University of Bonn estimated that 2003 UB313 is about 1,864 miles across.
That makes it larger than Pluto, which has a diameter of about 1,429 miles.
"It is now increasingly hard to justify calling Pluto a planet if UB313 is not also given this status," Bertoldi said in a statement.
Details were published in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature.
Brown said the Germans' measurement seemed plausible and said his team was using the Hubble Space Telescope to directly figure out its size.
He and his associates had originally reported that 2003 UB313 was thought to be larger than Pluto and estimated that it was most likely between 1,398 miles and 2,175 miles in diameter.
Among themselves, Brown, Trujillo and Rabinowitz have referred to the main body as "Xena," after the sword-wielding syndicated TV warrior princess. The moon naturally has been called "Gabrielle," after the TV Xena's trusty sidekick.
Neither name is likely to stick, however. By convention, all new planets and Kuiper Belt objects are named after gods of various mythologies, and "Xena" and "Gabrielle" don't qualify.
The previous contender for 10th planet, Quaoar, discovered by Brown, Trujillo and Rabinowitz in 2002, was named after the creator god of an American Indian tribe that lived in Southern California. It is about as far from the sun as Pluto is but has only one-third the mass.
Astronomers have been debating for several years over what a planet is and whether Pluto should keep its status.
A new model of the solar system at the American Museum of Natural History in New York leaves out Pluto, which prompted a letter-writing campaign from schoolchildren to reinstate the ninth planet when the permanent exhibit is unveiled.
The difficulty is that there is no official definition of a planet, and some argue that setting standards such as size limits would open the door too wide.
When the largest asteroids, Ceres, Vesta and Pallas, were discovered in the early 19th century, they were counted as planets until it became clear that they were part of a much larger belt of large rocks and planetoids ringing the Sun between Mars' and Jupiter's orbits.
Likewise, Pluto and Quaoar are part of the Kuiper Belt, an even larger ring of small objects orbiting the Sun beyond Neptune.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Source |
Interesting...So, what do you think? Is this new "planet" a planet, and all those things about this "planet?"
What about Pluto? Should it still be considered a planet? What constitutes a planet?
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Wed Feb 01, 2006 8:28 pm |
|
Pluto should still be considered a planet. Because I am too lazy to not call it anything else.
That said, 2003 UB313 seems like a good candidate for a planet too.
The IAU really needs to make up its mind. And on that note, the American Museum of Natural History shouldn't count Pluto out prematurely--who are they to make the decision?  If we start counting planets however we want, we might actually start showing individual thought or something. If the IAU says it's a planet, and we don't bother overthrowing the IAU, then we should respect their authority in the matter. 
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Wed Feb 01, 2006 10:19 pm |
|
Pluto really shouldn't be considered a planet, but it already is, so why change it? No, this new object isn't a planet.
|
|
|
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
| Wed Feb 01, 2006 11:37 pm |
|
ask any scientist and they will most likely give you the same answer, Pluto is just dual moons orbiting each other.
More research of this new "planetoid". Until then, I will not pass judgement.
|
|
|
Birdy
Socialist
Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 13502
Location: Here.
|
| Thu Feb 02, 2006 5:46 am |
|
Wow! So cool!
Well, I think we should still call Pluto a planet, since we've always done that. It's maybe a little bit of an outcast in the solar system cuz it's small and weird, but I don't care! 
-------signature-------
Nosce te ipsum
|
|
|
PrankishSmart
Rear Admiral
Joined: 29 Apr 2002
Posts: 4779
Location: Hobart, Australia.
|
| Thu Feb 02, 2006 6:46 am |
|
| LightningBoy wrote: | | Pluto really shouldn't be considered a planet, but it already is, so why change it? No, this new object isn't a planet. |
Pluto has an atmosphere, KBO's don't.
KBO's are nothing more than rocks in distant orbit around the sun. Pluto has seasons and an orbiting moon. It qualifys more for a planet than this KBO (which isn't new news), regardless of size.
|
|
|
Seven of Nine
Sammie's Mammy
Joined: 16 Jun 2001
Posts: 7871
Location: North East England
|
| Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:04 am |
|
I think it should be based on whether it has an atmosphere (if it's got one, it's a planet- if it hasn't then it isn't). That said, I remember the announcement in 2002 
|
|
|
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:13 pm |
|
| PrankishSmart wrote: | | Pluto has an atmosphere, KBO's don't. |
Then what about Mercury? It doesn't have an "atmosphere" per se, save for the vaporised particles of rock that get scoured off its day-side by the sun.
I tend to agree that an atmosphere helps characterise a planet. But we'd leave poor Mercury out in the cold.
If we continue to mince words as much as scientists do, I'm thinking we'll have to discard the foolishly broad notion as such a thing as a "planet". We'll have to start classifying them a bit more: terrestrial planets, gas giants, ice giants, Those Weird Things Out Near Pluto, etc.
|
|
|
Seven of Nine
Sammie's Mammy
Joined: 16 Jun 2001
Posts: 7871
Location: North East England
|
| Thu Feb 02, 2006 1:53 pm |
|
I like the "Those Weird Things Out Near Pluto"- should be a technical classification
Maybe Murcury isn't a planet?
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Thu Feb 02, 2006 2:24 pm |
|
I say we just stick with the nine current planets, and unless we find something definintive in the future, then we consider.
|
|
|
Cathexis
The Angel of Avalon
Joined: 26 Dec 2001
Posts: 5901
Location: ~~ Where Dreams Have No End�
|
| Thu Feb 02, 2006 6:39 pm |
|
I'd like to see more research done on the definition of planet, that way the astronomers and scientists involved in the study of this new celestial body will have a more definitive frame of reference for naming it officially.
Atmosphere, seasons, moons, etc are all factors that should be considered in the characterization of planets.
According to Wikipedia, the definition of planet is quite elusive, and there are many interpretations of its meaning. Most scientists agree, however, that in order for a body to be considered a planet, it must orbit a star, be above a certain size (usually large enough to be rounded by its own gravity), and yet not be large enough to commence nuclear fusion, have a unique orbit, etc.
The 2003 UB313, for the moment, could be classified as a planetoid (planetlike)--at least until a proper, more cemented definition can be ascertained.
Last edited by Cathexis on Thu Feb 02, 2006 6:43 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
Lord Borg
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 27 May 2003
Posts: 11214
Location: Vulcan Capital City, Vulcan
|
| Thu Feb 02, 2006 6:42 pm |
|
Hmm... I've always been told pluto is a planet. It depends on what they classifiy as a planet, but for many years now, pluto has been a planet, in our system, they shouldnt change that. As for the new discovery, it sounds like a planet to me.
|
|
|
Cathexis
The Angel of Avalon
Joined: 26 Dec 2001
Posts: 5901
Location: ~~ Where Dreams Have No End�
|
| Thu Feb 02, 2006 6:45 pm |
|
It looks like NASA is calling this heavenly body Sedna. Interesting!
|
|
|
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:46 pm |
|
| Cathexis wrote: | | It looks like NASA is calling this heavenly body Sedna. Interesting! |
90377 Sedna is a different planetoid and smaller than Pluto. It was discovered by the same people but is entirely different.
2003 UB313 won't have another name until the IAU officially decides on one.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:51 pm |
|
Yeah, I knew Sedna sounded familiar.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
borgslayer
Rear Admiral
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Posts: 2646
Location: Las Vegas
|
| Thu Feb 02, 2006 8:20 pm |
|
Pluto is a planet since it has 2 moons. Charon is one and the other moon which I have no name was discovered months ago.
As predicted...
There are 4 planets of different types.
Molten/Rocky Planets - (Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars)
Gas/Liquid Planets - (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune)
Ice Planets - (Pluto, Quaoar, Sedna, One more planet to be discovered in our solar system)
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Thu Feb 02, 2006 8:54 pm |
|
Um, I'd like to classify Earth in a different category. M-class
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Seven of Nine
Sammie's Mammy
Joined: 16 Jun 2001
Posts: 7871
Location: North East England
|
| Fri Feb 03, 2006 7:20 am |
|
It's in both. Happy?
|
|
|
Cathexis
The Angel of Avalon
Joined: 26 Dec 2001
Posts: 5901
Location: ~~ Where Dreams Have No End�
|
| Sun Feb 05, 2006 10:29 pm |
|
| Hitchhiker wrote: | | Cathexis wrote: | | It looks like NASA is calling this heavenly body Sedna. Interesting! |
90377 Sedna is a different planetoid and smaller than Pluto. It was discovered by the same people but is entirely different.
2003 UB313 won't have another name until the IAU officially decides on one. |
Ah, okay..thanks for clearing that up then!
It's sooo confusing!
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
