...is anyone else as tired of this debate as I am?

Not to denigrate the fine discussion & many valid points made, but boy would I love to see some closure. More & more I favor the "classical planets" concept: we got 9, that's all there is, unless we find something truly huge way out there someday.

Simplistic, yes...but since this whole thing is by now glaringly subjective, why not keep it simple? "Planet" is an honorary term in some ways, really; it's ancient as well. Maybe the line should be drawn temporally. Pluto was discovered in 1930, and was the last undisputed discovery of a planet; maybe it should be the last such, period. Anything else found has to be Mercury-sized or better to qualify.

Arbitrary? You bet. Unscientific? Yes, of course, because this is really not about science at all, it's about categorization & public perceptions. Still, this seems to make as much sense as other proposals with the added advantage of keeping the criteria understandable & easily applicable to new discoveries (and there's gonna be a LOT of them; just wait. We ain't seen nothin' yet.)

Like you wouldn't believe.

...My incredible psychic powers did not fail me!

Why is everyone so down on this debate and this process? People with a professional scientific interest are having their say... experienced amateur astronomers are having their say... enthusiastic skywatchers with no scientific background but a fascination with Out There are having their say... kids learn about the variety of objects in the solar syatem through it... the public were able to watch a quite historic debate on the internet, live... science is working before our eyes...

Much better to have this discussion, I think, than to just say "Whatever" with no opinion at all when a decree like this is handed down from above. Shows we're not sheep happy to trot in whichever direction the sheepdog wants.

"They can't even decide what a planet it - what's with that?"

Science does not come out of this well. Teachers are confused, students are getting mixed messages, text books are right today and wrong tomorrow. It's a bit of a farce - I wish it would just go away because ultimately it just doesn't matter. At the very best, this situation will end with headlines such as "After 5 years debate, Pluto IS a planet" or "6 Years on, Planet debate rages on" or "7 year itch, science squabble over Pluto continues" or "Planetary U-Turn, Pluto back in the pack".

Ever tried to explain why PLuto isn't a planet anymore? I'm embarrassed for science trying to explain it.

One word to sum up the entire thing

Crap

Doug

All true, pretty much, but I still say it's better to get this sorted out now than just bury our heads in the sand and pretend the problem's not there. It is there, it's not going anywhere. I was really fed up with this too, a while ago, thought it was a huge mistake, and I still think the Pluto decision was wrong and the IAU were ******** idiots for shrinking Sol system's planetary population instead of increasing it, but hey, water, bridge...

I've decided I should use this as an opportunity to get people talking about and interested in planets, of our own Sun and of others out there, and just get people interested in astronomy in general. There's a lunar eclipse tonight, but the weather is so rubbish here in Kendal right now that it's unlikely we'll see it. But people will still go up to the castle anyway, on the off chance, and they'll hang around a while in the hope of the cloud clearing I'm sure. As they wait we'll talk to them, about Phoenix, the Hubble repair mission, ths ISS, and also, yes, Pluto and the "Great Debate".

I think it's been fairly well demonstrated that 'science' is unable to sort this for itself. Two years on and we still have a nonsensical definition, a shed load of confusion, and frankly, a rather embarrassing 'debate' webcast that achieved 9/10ths of 4/5ths of exactly nothing. Some scientists made this mess, and science in general is incapable of resolving it.

This isn't a good thing.

I am a bit tired of of the debate but at the same time it is refreshing to see the public's attention perk up.

The silver lining in all this is that due to the incredible advance in our observing technologies we are finding all these new objects out in the Kuiper Belt and around other suns. The entire reason the question even came up is because of all these new discoveries....

The solar systems we are finding out there are very different in architecture to our own serene system.
http://astronomynow.com/080807Computersimu...initsplace.html

Delight in the fact that we are learning new things and discovering new worlds and worldlets at an increasing pace.

Great time to be alive....

Craig

Ever tried to explain why PLuto isn't a planet anymore?

The number of Outreach talks I give? Hmmm, yes, just a few times...

It usually goes something along the lines of "A tiny number of a small bunch of unelected people decided to turn history on its head and mess up something that wasn't messed up in the first place. But that's not the end of the story yet, so watch this space. In the meantime, if you want to think of Pluto as a planet - like me - fine; if you don't, that's fine too. Eventually heads will be banged against brick walls and sense will prevail. Until then, look at this picture of xxxx That's actually a..."

...good summary!

I honestly think that the "classical planet" concept will prevail. It makes the Solar System something relatively simple to visualize, yet allows room for all the other exotic critters.

And ya know...

Life is messy and so is the universe. I found the debate lively, and unstodgy. Scientists ARE human afterall. Falleable and as full of emotion as any one else.

It really does not matter how this falls out..... Pluto is still Pluto, Enceladus will still be geysering, the hydrocabon dunes of Titan will stll advance under the nitorgen/methane winds, and we will continue to be amazed and humbled at the wonders all around us.

Have to go watch my grandsons now.... I wonder what wonders they will know when they reach my age?

Craig

Stu...

and I apologize in advance because I am not currently a speaker to the public.... so I am not trying to presume anything here
and you may have already mentioned this, but one way to introduce to children the reason this debate is happening is BECAUSE we are learning SO many new things about these worlds and the universe that we are not so sure about our old definitions. And, my goodness, what wonderful things might THEY discover in the future that will turn definitions on their heads?

This is how science works.

Craig

Don't all the objects in a system orbit the barycenter? It the barycenter is outside the surface of Pluto what about Nix and Hydra?

Yep, that's one of my (**Outreachbabble Alert**) "Core Messages" and one of the reasons why this whole debate can be useful. Kind of a "lemons into lemonade" thing

Heck, throw the question back at them:
"What do you think it should be?" "Here are some objects in our solar system and some we've found elsewhere, where do you think it fits in?"


If you don't like the IAU decision, don't follow it. From here on in, I'm making up my own list.
I call my current set "round and possibly-differentiated bodies that orbit stuff"; everything else is a "rock" or an "ice chunk".

Discoveries will and should be always able to change the status quo. The definitions need to be flexible and adaptable or they quickly become irrelevant.

[EDIT: And no, I don't view the New Horizons mission as a checkbox visit to the "last planet"; I view it as the first mission to a completely new and important kind of planetary object: I expect huge surprises and discoveries at Pluto and major implications for other stuff "out there".]

[/flame off]

-Mike