So Pluto is a planet!?

[Bill Phil]

But this is a scientific definition. The point is not to please the most people. The point is to make a consistent categorization of natural bodies.

That's exactly what that does. It's a categorization system that's much more efficient than the current one.

[Kryten]

In terms of categorisation, it's exactly the same system. Changing a few names isn't going to make any system 'more efficient'.

[Bill Phil]

In terms of categorisation, it's exactly the same system. Changing a few names isn't going to make any system 'more efficient'.

It's more efficient because the names make more sense, less confusion. And so it's easier to understand.

[frankm134]

short answer: no

long answer: back then astronomers discovered a planet they called Ceres then they found 3 more like it in the same area, kids were taught the 13 planets of the solar system. But then astronomers kept on finding more and more objects in the same area then they reorganized it into the asteroid belt. the same thing is going on by Pluto and astronomers are finding more objects like Pluto in the same area, sound familiar? Anyway they found an object larger than pluto and reorginized all those objects into the Kuiper belt

Edited November 8, 2014 by frankm134

[Camacha]

Ceres then they found 3 more like it in the same area

There are no objects like Ceres in the belt, since it is by far the largest and and the heaviest and, importantly, the only one that is round.

[Bill Phil]

short answer: no

long answer: back then astronomers discovered a planet they called Ceres then they found 3 more like it in the same area, kids were taught the 13 planets of the solar system. But then astronomers kept on finding more and more objects in the same area then they reorganized it into the asteroid belt. the same thing is going on by Pluto and astronomers are finding more objects like Pluto in the same area, sound familiar? Anyway thy found an object larger than pluto nd rorgnized all those objects into the Kuiper belt

Then just call Eris a planet and don't waste time at IAU conferences. Besides, the IAU are kind of sketchy, NASA discovered an error on their Lat/Lon on Vesta, and so they made one with less errors. Then the IAU was outraged, so I would hardly call them a scientific authority if something that small makes them tic.

[frankm134]

Then just call Eris a planet and don't waste time at IAU conferences. Besides, the IAU are kind of sketchy, NASA discovered an error on their Lat/Lon on Vesta, and so they made one with less errors. Then the IAU was outraged, so I would hardly call them a scientific authority if something that small makes them tic.

Eris is still technically part of the Kuiper belt. so its like calling Ceres a planet rather than part of the asteroid belt because it is one of the biggest objects in the belt

[Camacha]

Eris is still technically part of the Kuiper belt. so its like calling Ceres a planet rather than part of the asteroid belt because it is one of the biggest objects in the belt

There are no objects like Ceres in the belt, since it is by far the largest and and the heaviest and, importantly, the only one that is round.

Does not sound too bad.

[worir4]

Lol, I didn't realise how big this got...

[problemecium]

Someday I imagine if our civilization becomes truly space-faring we'll have to ditch the existing planet/moon/asteroid/dwarf classification altogether. Gas giants are very liable to have moons that are as big, and potentially as life-bearing, as planets (e.g. Pandora or Laythe), and arguing over whether it's a "planet orbiting a planet" or "technically a moon" is just going to frustrate and confuse people.

I can't guess too precisely about the new system, but I imagine it'll mainly distinguish between objects that have or lack hydrostatic equilibrium or nuclear fusion. A Y-class star, for example, may end up being reclassified as an interstellar planet, and our moon may too end up being called a planet due to its bulk - or whatever word we adopt to replace "planet".

[michaelsteele3]

Pluto is smaller than Russia in terms of surface area and all that.

I still think it's a dwarf planet.

[Pds314]

Russia is a dwarf planet!

Kazakhstan is a moon.

[Camacha]

Pluto is smaller than Russia in terms of surface area and all that.

So you are saying that Russia should be classified as a star? Or just a full blown planet?

[Alchemist]

Russia is a dwarf planet!

Kazakhstan is a moon.

EU is an asteriod belt then.