Chrononautic Log

«	NSF and The Feminist Press @CUNY call for YA book proposals

Main

So, who’s going to Yokohama?

Best planetary mnemonic ever

11 o'clock, August 24, 2006

Thankfully the IAU seems to have adopted a proposal that more or less makes sense,* but just in case No Iceball Left Behind should again rear its ugly head:

My View Embraces Moving Classifications, Just Stop Uncovering New Planets Called 2003 UB313

(Via Asymptotia)

Unfortunately, Jackie’s proposal to drop Pluto into the sun was not adopted. The IAU may yet live to regret this.

* By “more or less makes sense,” I mean it’s fairly simple, can unlike the earlier proposal be applied to new discoveries without the intervention of a committee, and conforms broadly to the way the word is generally used. Also, I’m pleased to see that by limiting its application to our own solar system, it avoids unfair discrimination against bodies like Oph 1622 B.

Comments

I'm puzzled by the fact that the media reports imply that Charon is not considered a 'dwarf planet' by this set of rules.

The center of mass in the Pluto-Charon system is *not inside either body*; it should therefore be considered a double dwarf planet, not a dwarf planet with a moon.

—— aphrael, 9:17 AM, Friday, August 25, 2006

The IAU's new definitions don't make sense for approximately 50,000 reasons. A planet's a planet only if it "has cleared the neighborhood around its orbit."

Which means that Jupiter itself isn't a planet unless we ignore the 50,000 Trojan asteroids.

Earth, Neptune, and Mars aren't planets either, by this definition.

Now it would be pretty cool if the IAU said that only Mercury, Venus, Saturn, and Uranus are real planets. I could almost support that. But they'll never admit it.

—— Walter Jon Williams, 2:18 PM, Monday, August 28, 2006

I'm less and less happy with the vagueness of "cleared" and "neighborhood", myself. (Although in the case of the Trojan points I could argue that Jupiter has "cleared" its neighborhood, in much the same sense that I've "cleared" the dining room table when the papers that were scattered all over it are neatly stacked in one corner.)

That said, I still think it's closer to common sense than the previous proposal. "Nearly round" is even worse than "cleared" and "neighborhood", and "an IAU process will be established to evalulate planet candidates near this boundary" is just silly.

It's all this nonsense about planets needing to revolve around stars (or worse, the Sun) that's really bugging me.

—— David Moles, 4:16 AM, Tuesday, August 29, 2006

There should be more categories of planets. Planets that have cleared their neighborhoods are Slipstream planets. All others are merely "wishy-washy."

;)

—— Matt Hulan, 11:46 AM, Tuesday, August 29, 2006

What there needs to be is a lot more THROWING OF THINGS INTO THE SUN.

—— Jackie M., 12:25 PM, Tuesday, August 29, 2006

No argument from me, but I'm not convinced Neptune wouldn't produce a tail.

—— David Moles, 12:59 PM, Tuesday, August 29, 2006

What does it take to get an infernokrusher planet?

—— aphrael, 1:19 PM, Tuesday, August 29, 2006

Infernokrusher planets are planets that when THROWN INTO THE SUN, crush it.

—— Matt Hulan, 1:55 PM, Tuesday, August 29, 2006

Here’s what happens when you downgrade planets!

http://www.worth1000.com/entries/261000/261299lRTQ_w.jpg