Plutoids: a new class of objects beyond Neptune, Astronomy, politics or damage control |
Plutoids: a new class of objects beyond Neptune, Astronomy, politics or damage control |
![]()
Post
#1
|
|
![]() Member ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 340 Joined: 11-April 08 From: Sydney, Australia Member No.: 4093 ![]() |
Article on the BBC website: 'Non-planet' Pluto gets new class
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7449735.stm QUOTE Now an IAU committee, meeting in Oslo, has suggested that small, nearly spherical objects orbiting beyond Neptune should carry the "plutoid" tag. It also goes on to say that not everybody is too excited about it: QUOTE "It's just some people in a smoke-filled room who dreamed it up," he told the Associated Press. "Plutoids or haemorrhoids, whatever they call it. This is irrelevant." -------------------- |
|
|
![]() |
![]()
Post
#2
|
|
![]() Merciless Robot ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Admin Posts: 8783 Joined: 8-December 05 From: Los Angeles Member No.: 602 ![]() |
Oh, God....here we go again.
![]() Let me just restate what seems to me at least to be the correct perspective. Natural objects exist along a continuum. Conversely, people tend to categorize things, and get upset when a given object doesn't seem to fit neatly into one category or another. The ONLY top-level objects in the Universe that are apparently discrete, distinct, and identical to each other are hadrons & leptons; everything else is kinda fuzzy, somewhere in-between. (I do not expand that definition to include atoms because of isotopes; the exception that proves the rule is the chemical behavior of deuterium & tritium, which differs from that of basic hydrogen in many fundamental ways.) Therefore, the term 'planet', undoubtedly like most of our terminology for probably all nouns, is subjective. Fomenting long, bitter debates over what does and what does not "deserve" this term doesn't serve any practical purpose at all, and frankly might become a seriocomic, rather embarrassing spectacle in the eyes of the general public...who well might be wondering why all these PhDs making the mythical big bucks are wasting time on the issue. Pluto is a/an [insert opinion here]. Fine. Just insert an opinion, and then leave it alone. -------------------- A few will take this knowledge and use this power of a dream realized as a force for change, an impetus for further discovery to make less ancient dreams real.
|
|
|
![]()
Post
#3
|
|
![]() The Poet Dude ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Moderator Posts: 5551 Joined: 15-March 04 From: Kendal, Cumbria, UK Member No.: 60 ![]() |
Therefore, the term 'planet', undoubtedly like most of our terminology for probably all nouns, is subjective. Fomenting long, bitter debates over what does and what does not "deserve" this term doesn't serve any practical purpose at all, and frankly might become a seriocomic, rather embarrassing spectacle in the eyes of the general public...who well might be wondering why all these PhDs making the mythical big bucks are wasting time on the issue. All true, but I think it's unwise to just dismiss this issue as a squabble or an irrelevence. As I said at the time, although it did make sense scientifically - from a "terminology tidying up" point of view - the fundamental problem with this particular case was that it was a change of identity for an object that was lodged in the public's consciousness as firmly and securely as a mountaineering spike hammered into the side of El Capitan. I have had soooo many discussions with people about this, and the overwhelming majority were of the opinion that Pluto had been a planet for over 70 years, why did "you people" (i.e. me, i.e. astronomer types) just decide to change it? And in all honesty I can't defend the change, I just can't. Personally I think it would have been excusable and understandable to the IAU to throw its hands up and, for once, look up from its computer screens and fat books of tables and figures and definitions, acknowledge sentimentality and tradition and just crown Pluto as an "Honourary planet", but declare that That Was That, and from now on new rules would apply. The whole "dwarf planet" thing was simply embarrassing, a real fudge, and now this "plutoid" term is going to further cloud already muddy waters. This isn't just my ranting opinion here, it's based on experience out there, in the real world, where the people I talk to in community centres, school halls, museums, libraries and the like during my Outreach talks are now genuinely confused by this. And trust me, many of them now believe that, well, if small groups of astronomers can go around changing things like this, then astronomy IS a stuffy old science after all, for wild-haired scientists with patches on their elbows, which, when science is already being challenged to tackle global warming, scientists are trying to push back the growling tsunami of "Intelligent Design" and Creationism, speak up for manned and unmanned space exploration and convince people that no, cave men and dinosaurs did not fight it out, is disastrous, IMO. Then there's the problem in schools. Word hasn't filtered through the system into the classrooms yet, not here anyway, and when I had to tell a roomful of 8 and 9 year olds on Monday morning that Pluto - represented by a cute little brown-paper covered ball, hanging down from a piece of string that spanned their classroom - wasn't a planet after all, they were confused, disappointed and angry all at once. Boy, did it take some explaining that a tiny number of people, in a hall, had decided that Pluto wasn't a planet after all, maybe 15 mins eaten out of my hour-long talk. But as it's official now I towed the official party line and passed on the new knowledge as a good Outreacher is obliged to do, and now all those kids and their teacher know that Pluto isn't a planet but a "dwarf planet" - I am NOT going back to tell them it's a "plutoid" too! - so yaay me... ![]() Change is necessary, essential, I'm not questioning that. And yes, with its weird orbit, small size and odd behaviour Pluto was, and still is, and I feel always will be, a big, ugly, fat black fly sitting smack in the middle of the pot of lovely white ointment that is the "official" view of our solar system, but seriously, what an absolute **** up this has all been. -------------------- |
|
|
![]()
Post
#4
|
|
Newbie ![]() Group: Members Posts: 7 Joined: 24-July 07 Member No.: 2948 ![]() |
And trust me, many of them now believe that, well, if small groups of astronomers can go around changing things like this, then astronomy IS a stuffy old science after all, for wild-haired scientists with patches on their elbows, Then there's the problem in schools. Word hasn't filtered through the system into the classrooms yet, not here anyway Hi Stu, and all, I took over 10,000 Minnesota schoolkids on tours of the universe in my portable planetarium this year. I'd like to respond to the bolded items in your post. Most of the time I let them decide what to explore in the solar system, and I'd say about 80% of the time someone wanted to go to Pluto. This was grades 2-9, all inclusive. And, when I asked the question, "what is Pluto?", most classes had at least one person who knew its current status. Most of the time it was a chorus of "dwarf planet!" So the new info is getting into the classrooms here. Kudos to Minnesota teachers! I got the impression that they didn't exactly know what that means, so I always made sure to give them a good explanation. Yes, it takes a while....but as you said above it's our job in outreach! And I don't know exactly what the students come away "believing" when I tell them about the change in designation. (referring to the stuffy old astronomers.) I try to make the point that this is what is so exciting about astronomy. We are constantly discovering new things, and sometimes that has to change the way we see/categorize things. I sometimes use this analogy: "Ceres was discovered about 200 years ago. At first it was thought to be a planet. Then astronomers learned that its size is very small compared to the Earth, and they started discovering more and more objects in its region. Eventually they realized it belonged to a different, new category, which they named asteriods." I tell them to keep that story in mind.... Once I get past Neptune, I say this: "Pluto was discovered about 80 years ago. At first it was thought to be a planet. Then astronomers learned that its size is very small compared to the Earth, and by about 15 years ago they started discovering more and more objects in its region. It's like another asteroid belt out there! Eventually they realized it belonged to a different, new category, which they named Kuiper belt objects." Does that story sound familiar? I like to think I'm doing a good job with the Pluto story. And I look forward to having to change it with new discoveries! |
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 4th May 2024 - 04:31 PM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |
![]() |