What is a planet?

[cartmancakes]

People seem to keep saying that the decision was made with only limited input.  However, that meeting is open to ALL astronomers and ALL who attend may vote for or against any resolution.  If there's any astronomers who disagree with the vote, they only have themselves to blame for not attending...

[Ottawan]

The decision WAS made with limited input as most of the astronomers opposed to the resolution were not invited in the first place.

I remember there being a heated discussion on several message boards, BAUT particularly over this issue.

But not to worry, the dcision is not carved in stone

[cartmancakes]

from wikipedia...

"The number having registered their attendance at the Assembly at the time of the vote stood at 2411, but only 424 attended the plenary session, not all of whom voted."

"issues of a "primarily scientific nature" (as determined by the Executive Committee), upon which voting is restricted to individual members,"

"The IAU has 9,785 individual members, all of whom are professional astronomers"

I would say that with the above statistics, if you are a member of the IAU, you can only blame yourself.  Every member is allowed to go to these meetings.  Every member should have been able to vote.  Less than 424 did.  Everyone complains.  Bad jujuj.

[cartmancakes]

Every member should have been able to vote, but as Ottawan says,The decision was made with limited input as most of the astronomers opposed to the resolution were not invited in the first place. They simply weren't invited.

It was a typical case of those high in Astronomy expressing ones professional expertise over those less qualified and getting away with it.

It's the same setup as the United Nations where the 180 members of the General Assembly would thrash out a resolution, only to see it destroyed by the power of veto by a single member of the Security Council because of that country's own commercial interests. That's why the world's in chaos, and why the United Nations is, and always will be, an unworkable Organization.

No difference.

Glactus   

Every single member of the org was invited.  If they weren't in the org, they wouldn't be invited.  Of the limited number of members who actually attended the conference, the majority who actually decided to vote did what they did.

I heard of grad students being invited.  If they don't pay the dues, they can't participate.  That's probably all it is.  And from what I hear, the annual dues aren't unaffordable.

[Satanic Mechanic]

SM's definition of a planet:

1.  It orbits the sun and not another planet.
2.  It is x amount in surface area and y amount in mass.  (I never thought of a good number yet.  Maybe use Pluto as the low end of the scale.)
3.  It can be destoryed by the Deathstar.

[ijuin]

so if the object masses X tons it is a planet, but if it masses even one ton less it is not a planet?

[Satanic Mechanic]

so if the object masses X tons it is a planet, but if it masses even one ton less it is not a planet?

You got it chief.

SM

[LunarOrbit]

What if we visit a planet and remove just enough rock and soil samples to drop it below the necessary mass to qualify as a planet?

[Satanic Mechanic]

What if we visit a planet and remove just enough rock and soil samples to drop it below the necessary mass to qualify as a planet?

Yep.  It devalues the planet to become a dwarf planet which would be easier to buy, especially with the current interest rates.  Then you contract out for all the garbage to be dumped off at the dwarf planet, those dumping payments go towards the mortgage, insurance and property taxes (govt' always get a share).  Bury the garbage, do a little landscaping, the mass of the planet goes up and now you can resell it as a regular planet.  Nothing but profit and no capital gains tax! 

Thank you for watching "Flip this Planet".  Next episode:  8 week flip of a Gaseous Giant planet with a budget of $50,000.

SM


p.s. To those who do not know, this is a parody of "Flip this House", a program here in the U.S. that shows people buying homes, fixing them up and reselling them quickly (called "Flipping").

[Johno]

I have said to my students for years that I have deep suspicions about Pluto's planethood, so much so that when the decision came down a couple of my year 8s said "You've got your wish, sir!"

The thing that is the biggest factor for me is Pluto's funny orbit.  That may be foolish on my part, but it seems to me that if something is on such an eccentric orbit, it is more likely to be captured than part of the original accretion disc.  Am I missing something?

Either we include all the Kuiper Belt or we reject Pluto.  Although I'd have been happy to keep Pluto for purely historical reasons (i.e. say "Pluto does not satisfy the requirements for a planet, but it is still called a planet because all the acronyms end with P, and it's a right pain to change them now.")

[jdbenner]

I like SM's DeathStar test.  When can we try it?

[DonPMitchell]

Didn't the philosopher Hegel prove that there could only be 7 planets?  Maybe we should check his arguemnt, he might have been right!

[cartmancakes]

Didn't the philosopher Hegel prove that there could only be 7 planets?  Maybe we should check his arguemnt, he might have been right!

There goes Mercury!

[evancise]

Check out this news article:  NASA Launches Probe To Inform Pluto of Demotion