12 Planets: New definition proposed

Cube

Newbie
Joined
Aug 3, 2006
Messages
142
Reaction score
0
http://news.com.com/Pluto+dodges+a+bullet/2100-11397_3-6106280.html

Latest verdict has come on the number of planets.

That number is 12 or more

"New" Planets are Ceres (located in the asteroid belt), Charon (Pluto's "moon", which will make it a 2-planet system), and 2003 UB_313.

However, Pluto, Charon and UB_313 may be sub-classed into "Plutons" (So, Inner Planets, Outer Planets and Plutons???)


planets.jpg
 
Stupid slippery slope.
First we let in Pluto, now all the riffraff from the solar system is coming in.
I remember back in the day when the planets had class.
Now anything that's vaguely spherical and orbits the sun calls itself a planet. Me, I'm a staunch advocate of declassifying Pluto and only recognizing eight planets.
 
These planets are coming into our solar system, its ours, and they are trying to change it. NO!
 
Stupid idea. Why ruin a good thing? (see below)

My Very Elegant Mother Just Served Us Nine Pickles.
 
I find it weird how Pluto doesn't follow the same orbit plane as the rest of the planets... and its orbit isnt even circular. doesnt that mean it wasnt formed at the beginning of the solar system?
 
Stupid idea. Why ruin a good thing? (see below)

My Very Elegant Mother Just Served Us Nine Pickles.

How sweet :thumbs:



So what definition have they decided on?
For a celestial object to be considered a planet, it must satisfy two conditions:
  • The object must be in orbit around a star, but must not itself be a star
  • It must have enough mass for the body's own gravity to pull it into a nearly spherical shape

Its sounds reasonable, as a matter off fact I thought of a similar definition about a month ago
 
Pluto the Dog got hit in the face by a large mass of concrete today and gave birth to seven, beautiful Plutons.
 
Wouldn't it be a sound idea to make having some sort of an atmosphere a requirement to be a planet? Then we would have 8 planets and a whole bunch of planetoids.
 
now it will be

My Very Elegant Mother Cooked Jelly Sandwiches Underneath New Pudding Cakes...Ugh!

or

Mice Vivisect Ed's Mighty Cockroach as Joe Secretley Undoes Nelly's Plastic Crates...Uma!

I just can't fit that U in there.
 
Wouldn't it be a sound idea to make having some sort of an atmosphere a requirement to be a planet? Then we would have 8 planets and a whole bunch of planetoids.

I believe Mercury has little to no atmosphere, and so by this definition it would no longer be a planet. I personally believe that Mercury is worthy of the title though.
 
I think that we should make them "regular planets" and "irregular planets" like we do the moons of saturn or jupiter (as regular and irregular moons) based on the relative circular-ness of their orbits and the relative confinement to a single plane.

by that definition all twelve would be planets, but pluto, charon and UB101 (or whatever its called) would all be classified as "irregular"
 
My very elderly mother just sat under nut plants <--- that's ruined now.
 
I think we should blow up all the other planets. Then we have one!
 
What about the two other planets? My Balls

Best joke ever, give me the cookie
 
pfff the only reason pluto is still considered a planet is because the americans discovered it
 
Wouldn't it be a sound idea to make having some sort of an atmosphere a requirement to be a planet? Then we would have 8 planets and a whole bunch of planetoids.
That wouldn't work well, mercury would no longer be a planet(Pluto still would), and also, Saturn's moon Titan has an atmosphere.
 
Whatever. I just hope Will Wright isn't reading this.
 
Why not just break down the broad definition of "planet" into a bunch of different planet categories? And then just for tradition there could be a "classical" model of 9.
 
Back
Top