IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

9 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Fight for Pluto !, A Campaign to Reverse the Unjust Demotion
mars loon
post Aug 24 2006, 08:24 PM
Post #1


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 548
Joined: 19-March 05
From: Princeton, NJ, USA
Member No.: 212



Dear Friends,

Today I am extremely dissapointed that the Pluto Demoters have triumphed.

I respect their opinion, but disagree with it.

I strongly agree with Alan Stern's statement calling it "absurd" that only 424 astronomers were allowed to vote, out of some 10,000 professional astronomers around the globe.

This tiny group is clearly not at all representative by mathematics alone.

I believe we should formulate a plan to overturn this unjust decision and return Pluto to full planetary status, and as the first member of a third catagory of planets, Xena being number two. Thus a total of 10 Planets in our Solar System

Please respond if you agree that Pluto should be restored as a planet.

ken

Ken Kremer
Amateur Astronomers Association of Princeton
Program Chairman
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Holder of the Tw...
post Aug 24 2006, 08:37 PM
Post #2


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 544
Joined: 17-November 05
From: Oklahoma
Member No.: 557



I'm in.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
volcanopele
post Aug 24 2006, 08:48 PM
Post #3


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 3242
Joined: 11-February 04
From: Tucson, AZ
Member No.: 23



So am I.


--------------------
&@^^!% Jim! I'm a geologist, not a physicist!
The Gish Bar Times - A Blog all about Jupiter's Moon Io
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JRehling
post Aug 24 2006, 08:49 PM
Post #4


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2530
Joined: 20-April 05
Member No.: 321



QUOTE (mars loon @ Aug 24 2006, 01:24 PM) *
I believe we should formulate a plan to overturn this unjust decision and return Pluto to full planetary status, and as the first member of a third catagory of planets, Xena being number two. Thus a total of 10 Planets in our Solar System


You might want to carefully consider what, if any, counterproposal you make axiomatic to your movement. You might find that a majority support Pluto's planethood, but split with you on other subissues. Or, maybe you have already carefully considered the politics of it. Cheers, in any case.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
David
post Aug 24 2006, 09:00 PM
Post #5


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 809
Joined: 11-March 04
Member No.: 56



QUOTE (JRehling @ Aug 24 2006, 08:49 PM) *
You might want to carefully consider what, if any, counterproposal you make axiomatic to your movement. You might find that a majority support Pluto's planethood, but split with you on other subissues. Or, maybe you have already carefully considered the politics of it. Cheers, in any case.


I noted that in Jason's poll, a plurality of UMSFers voted for a proposal basically identical to the one that passed. However, a number greater than that plurality voted for a more expansive definition (more than 9 planets), but their numbers were split among several proposals. Which demonstrates your point, I think.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_DonPMitchell_*
post Aug 24 2006, 09:05 PM
Post #6





Guests






I agree, this is an arbitrary ruling by a small subset of astronomers. And who even says that astronomers alone get to decide? How many people involved in space research today have a degree in astronomy?

JRehling makes an important point. Any petition to reverse the ruling is likely to become fragmented by people promoting various different defintions of "planet".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jyril
post Aug 24 2006, 09:10 PM
Post #7


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 249
Joined: 11-June 05
From: Finland (62°14′N 25°44′E)
Member No.: 408



If you don't like Pluto's demotion, consider dwarf planets as a subgroup of the "true" planets (i.e. reversion of the Resolution 5B). Problem fixed.

Besides, only time will tell if people will adopt this definition.


--------------------
The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Planet X
post Aug 24 2006, 09:19 PM
Post #8


Junior Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 34
Joined: 9-January 06
Member No.: 639



At any rate, I'm in! What if it turns out Pluto and UB313 are the only TNOs over 2000 km in diameter out to several hundred AU? I also agree a new planet class should be created, perhaps one that covers bodies in the 2000-6000 km diameter range. Call it Sub-Terrestrial Planet? Then have bodies smaller than 2000 km called "dwarf planets?" Later!

J P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
David
post Aug 24 2006, 09:44 PM
Post #9


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 809
Joined: 11-March 04
Member No.: 56



QUOTE (DonPMitchell @ Aug 24 2006, 09:05 PM) *
JRehling makes an important point. Any petition to reverse the ruling is likely to become fragmented by people promoting various different defintions of "planet".


The obvious way around that is to focus on the results and not the reasoning.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mars loon
post Aug 24 2006, 10:18 PM
Post #10


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 548
Joined: 19-March 05
From: Princeton, NJ, USA
Member No.: 212



QUOTE (Planet X @ Aug 24 2006, 09:19 PM) *
At any rate, I'm in! What if it turns out Pluto and UB313 are the only TNOs over 2000 km in diameter out to several hundred AU?


Exactly. My proposal clearly is for a cut-off at 2000 km, 10 Planets known at this time. Thats reasonable and avoids the 43+ planet scenario which Mike Brown correctly points out.

Thanks for the response so far. Looking forward to more.

ken
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tedstryk
post Aug 24 2006, 10:20 PM
Post #11


Interplanetary Dumpster Diver
****

Group: Admin
Posts: 4405
Joined: 17-February 04
From: Powell, TN
Member No.: 33



This could really get messy if they find a Pluto-type world the size of Mercury or larger. Also, the fact that the differences between Mercury and Pluto, for example, generate a distinction, but not the differences between Mercury and Jupiter - this is disturbing.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alan Stern
post Aug 24 2006, 10:32 PM
Post #12


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 532
Joined: 19-February 05
Member No.: 173



Poll at chicagotribune.com...

Do you agree with the International Astronomical Union's decision to strip Pluto of its planetary status?

33.6%
Yes (1559 responses)

66.4%
No (3076 responses)

4635 total responses




CNN -

Were scientists correct in downgrading Pluto's status?

Yes - 26170
No - 43737
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jyril
post Aug 24 2006, 10:58 PM
Post #13


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 249
Joined: 11-June 05
From: Finland (62°14′N 25°44′E)
Member No.: 408



QUOTE (mars loon @ Aug 25 2006, 01:18 AM) *
Exactly. My proposal clearly is for a cut-off at 2000 km, 10 Planets known at this time. Thats reasonable and avoids the 43+ planet scenario which Mike Brown correctly points out.


Not necessarily. There may be many Pluto-sized objects waiting for discovery.


--------------------
The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jyril
post Aug 24 2006, 11:03 PM
Post #14


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 249
Joined: 11-June 05
From: Finland (62°14′N 25°44′E)
Member No.: 408



QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Aug 25 2006, 01:32 AM) *
Poll at chicagotribune.com...


I wonder what the result would have been if the question was "Would you like that Solar system has 50 planets?"

Of course a layman (and many scientists) doesn't want to demote Pluto. It's a purely sentimental issue to him.

Now the work lies making people realize that the "dwarf planets", including the giants in the asteroid belt, are interesting worlds of their own right. Not to forget major satellites.


--------------------
The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mars loon
post Aug 24 2006, 11:48 PM
Post #15


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 548
Joined: 19-March 05
From: Princeton, NJ, USA
Member No.: 212



QUOTE (Alan Stern @ Aug 24 2006, 10:32 PM) *
Poll at chicagotribune.com...
Do you agree with the International Astronomical Union's decision to strip Pluto of its planetary status?
33.6% Yes (1559 responses)
66.4% No (3076 responses)
4635 total responses
CNN -
Were scientists correct in downgrading Pluto's status?
Yes - 26170
No - 43737

Hi Alan,

thanks for your valuable contribution.

thats already > 100 x more votes than at the IAU

and I just saw a TV news report showing LOTS of EMPTY SEATS at the Prague Auditorium !!!

that does not impress me (as a fellow scientist) as overwhelming support for the demotion of Pluto.

The Fight for Pluto has begun .... !!!!!!!

as "The First Mission to the Last Planet" rockets outward to the unknown

ken
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

9 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 31st October 2024 - 11:29 PM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and 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.