View previous topic :: View next topic |
What do you consider a planet? |
Any object above 1000 kilometers wide |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
Any object above 2000 kilometers wide |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
Any object having enough gravitation pull to collect itself into a spherical form that is not orbiting another solid (like a moon) |
|
90% |
[ 19 ] |
Something else, I'm the scientist here! (please make your theory loud and clear) |
|
9% |
[ 2 ] |
|
Total Votes : 21 |
|
Author |
Message |
Rozy Registered User
Joined: 28 Apr 2005 Posts: 52 Location: Oklahoma
|
Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:32 pm Post subject: Planet Debate |
|
|
Everyone knows about about 2003 UB313(being called Xena for now) and how many people are exicted about it being the new planet however much of a critical issue is going through the scientific community. A man, Neil DeGrasse Tyson (now being called The Grinch Who Stole Pluto), wants to rewrite the definition of "planet" which may ultimately deny Pluto and UB313 as planets along with the many other ones like 2003 VB12 (Sedna, a former discovery in 2003), Quaoar, 2004 DW(Orcus), 2002 AW197, Vulcan(or whatever is left over of it), Ixion, and 2003 EL61 (Santa). Along with god knowns how many planet shaped object from the Oort Cloud and Kuipler Belt.
So now everyone is debate what is and is not a planet anymore. So far UB313 may be called a planet but the other object are being put on hold. If you want more info you might want to pick the October 24th issue of Newsweek. Includes pictures.
Whats your opinion on the matter?
Last edited by Rozy on Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:37 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Leonato Moderator
Joined: 23 Dec 2003 Posts: 319 Location: Nashville TN, USA
|
Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
1. Large enough gravitational field to form a sphere of matter.
2. In orbit of a star, not another planet
That is all that is needed to = planet... IMHO
PF's resident Lynx/Domestic Reader/DJ,
Leonato _________________ My Fury Code:
FFX2arsw A-- C+ D++ H+ M- P++ R+++ T+++ W Z- Sm# RLCI a36 cl++ d+ e+ f++ h+++ iwf+++ j+ p++ sm+ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
The Gryphon Registered User
Joined: 04 Jun 2003 Posts: 134 Location: Everywhere, yet no where.
|
Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Was going to write my response but then decided to read leonatos.. which totally says what I was gonna say.
There has long been a debate if pluto is a planet. So far it is still considered one just for historical purposes. This will be interesting to see how it turns out. Thanks for the news update.
*runs off looking for a copy of newsweek* _________________ Curious about Gryphon? Check out her Journal. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
beno Registered User
Joined: 29 May 2005 Posts: 352 Location: Liverpool, UK
|
Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think if it's got a gravitational force large enough to become a sphere, it orbits a star, it's a planet. _________________ You turn 18 and you realize nothing changes... Except you get junk mail for credit cards. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Vee Are Are Schee Mini-Boss
Joined: 12 Oct 2003 Posts: 943 Location: sneaking in dark corners
|
Posted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If it's romantic to call it a planet it should be a planet.
Which means Pluto should stay, and that we should have 10 planets. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
aryeon Registered User
Joined: 11 Mar 2004 Posts: 478 Location: nederland
|
Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 10:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Leonato has it right.
this object is clearly in a orbit around the sun.
that its orbit is not in the standard planetary plain, dosnot exclute it
from being a posible planet. _________________ i`m not hairy it is fur. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Concolor Registered User
Joined: 19 Nov 2001 Posts: 832 Location: South Carolina
|
Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 1:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A lot of the debate centers around the relationship the object has with the star it orbits. Some comets may be nearly as big as Pluto. They orbit the Sun. But they are not planets.
Basically, if the object is outside Neptune's orbit most of the time (that is, an Oort or Kuiper object) I don't think it ought to be referred to as a planet, no matter its size. Of course, if there were any really large (Mercury-sized or bigger) objects out there, we almost certainly would have detected them by now. _________________ Oddly enough, my life is based on a true story. (Ashleigh Brilliant) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Elfen_Furry Moderator
Joined: 18 Jun 2002 Posts: 2601 Location: NYC NY
|
Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 11:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pluto and Mercury are about the same size (Mercury being a bit bigger). And Pluto has its own moon- Chiron, which Mercury & Venus are Moonless.
The debate must be if it has enough mass to have its own gravity (an orbiting moon would be proof of such), then its a planet. Comets could be as big as planets but does not exort enough gravitation yeild to, shall we say, 'pull its own weight around'.
A denser mass means a stronger gravity. Pluto has enough to achive this, but an all ice-ball comet might not.
Pluto is a planet. I really dont care what so-called experts has to say. _________________ SHARKS In The Gene Pool South of Kosovo!
*CHOMP!* |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RedneckFur Registered User
Joined: 04 Oct 2005 Posts: 4 Location: NC
|
Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with the others...If it forms a sphere and orbits a star, its a planet, regarless of size........I know we have 9 named planets now, but I'm not familiar with those other objects....Assuming that they all are reconised as planets...how many will we have then?
I once heard that another planet was discovered orbiting between the sun and mercury.....is there any truth to this?
If you could give me some links where I can read up on those new planets, I would be very grateful
Redneckfur/Clydesdale _________________ -RedneckFur,
A horse, of course. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mwalimu Registered User
Joined: 08 Nov 2002 Posts: 782 Location: Normal, IL
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pflarrian Registered User
Joined: 05 Apr 2001 Posts: 251 Location: Wandering around...
|
Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:17 pm Post subject: Re: Planet Debate |
|
|
What constitutes a planet?
Now that's a really odd question that doesn't apparently have a correct answer. I am, alas, one of those strange people who plays a certain RPG subworld called SpellJammer (yes, that's 2nd ed AD&D), and lemme tell you, that game has some odd ideas as to what a planet is.
Personally, I would define a planet as:
1: any body of matter, doesn't matter the composition, shape, or anything of the sort as long as it is larger than, say, a mile in diameter or more? They used to classify planets by size at one time. A "Class A" planet was of x size, Class B was y size, and so on.
2: the object must be in orbit about - and you're gonna love THIS phrase - an object at the center of a galactic solar system. NOT all solar systems center on stars. Some of them center on former stars, or really dense masses of iron (if I remember correctly). Just because it's in orbit doesn't mean it's orbiting the right thing, or there wouldn't be moons.
This means that planets could be made ENTIRELY of gas, that a "star" is technically a planet as well, and that, so long as it's in orbit, a really large ball of ice could be a planet.
Of course, likewise, that means that a plant big enough to have it's own gravity well could be a planet too. _________________ I have gone away to look for myself. Should I get back before I return, please keep me here? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jbird Forum Hatchetman
Joined: 12 Aug 2002 Posts: 554 Location: Reloading.
|
Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:55 pm Post subject: Re: Planet Debate |
|
|
Pflarrian wrote: |
Of course, likewise, that means that a plant big enough to have it's own gravity well could be a planet too. |
Why does this remind me of Hitchhiker's Guide physics? _________________ (00:40:05) nbz: you win at the motherf***ing internet O_O |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Elfen_Furry Moderator
Joined: 18 Jun 2002 Posts: 2601 Location: NYC NY
|
Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Try figuiring out a trinary star system with 48 known planets and one of the stars is a dead nuetron star, another a red super giant and the third a white dwarf, each orbiting each other and all upon itself. _________________ SHARKS In The Gene Pool South of Kosovo!
*CHOMP!* |
|
Back to top |
|
|
RedneckFur Registered User
Joined: 04 Oct 2005 Posts: 4 Location: NC
|
Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 12:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
wow...that sounds difficult.....is there such a system? _________________ -RedneckFur,
A horse, of course. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
aryeon Registered User
Joined: 11 Mar 2004 Posts: 478 Location: nederland
|
Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
whell there will be no life on any of those planets, the radiation of the neutron star has destroyed any atempt. _________________ i`m not hairy it is fur. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|