Our class has been studying outer space, specifically the planets, the past couple weeks in science. When I was in elementary school we learned there were nine planets in our little solar system; Pluto being the farthest from the sun. Now the students learn that there are actually eight planets, Neptune being the farthest, and that once-upon-a-fairly-recent-time, scientists mistakently counted Pluto as a planet.
I can't help but feel sorry for Pluto. One day it's "Pluto is the farthest and coldest planet in the solar system." The next day it's, "Pluto? Oh that?! Yeah, that's just a hunk of ice." Losing it's planetary status: the ultimate demotion. Poor, poor Pluto.
I know it's rediculous to feel sorry for a planet, a lifeless one at that, but I can't help it. Feeling sorry for inanimate objects has been a compulsion of mine since childhood. As a kid I use to eat the orange and banana popsicles, even though I didn't really like the taste, because I hated to think of them sitting there all alone in the freezer thinking they were somehow inferior to their cherry and lime counterparts. My heart would positively break when I even thought about rotten little boys who would strap some innocent doll to a homemade soda bottle rocket. Oh, the humanity!
For such things as my popsicle eating habits and compassion for toys, I blame the book, The Velveteen Rabbit. I've known fully grown, well educated adults to get choked up reading this book about a stuffed, synthetic lagamorpha. And children are suppose to enjoy it?! I blame shows like The Adventures of Timmy the Tooth Brush, Veggie Tales, and Toy Story which gave inanimate objects voices, names, and worst of all, personalities. No wonder we're such a materialistic society!
In short, thanks to the media, I can't help but feel sorry for poor Pluto! Pluto, I salute you. You will always be a planet in my heart.
1 comment:
You are not alone in your views about Pluto. Many professional astronomers disagree with the demotion, and many teachers and textbooks continue to include Pluto with the planets.
Pluto IS a planet because unlike most objects in the Kuiper Belt, it has attained hydrostatic equilibrium, meaning it has enough self-gravity to have pulled itself into a round shape.
As of now, there are three other KBOs that meet this criterion and therefore should be classified as planets—Haumea, Makemake, and Eris. Only one KBO has been found to be larger than Pluto, and that is Eris.
The IAU definition makes no linguistic sense, as it states that dwarf planets are not planets at all. That’s like saying a grizzly bear is not a bear. Second, it defines objects solely by where they are while ignoring what they are. If Earth were placed in Pluto’s orbit, by the IAU definition, it would not be a planet. That is because the further away an object is from its parent star, the more difficulty it will have in clearing its orbit.
Significantly, this definition was adopted by only four percent of the IAU, most of whom are not planetary scientists. No absentee voting was allowed. It was done so in a highly controversial process that violated the IAU’s own bylaws, and it was immediately opposed by a petition of 300 professional astronomers saying they will not use the new definition, which they described accurately as “sloppy.” Also significant is the fact that many planetary scientists are not IAU members and therefore had no say in this matter at all.
Many believe we should keep the term planet broad to encompass any non-self-luminous spheroidal object orbiting a star.
We can distinguish different types of planets with subcategories such as terrestrial planets, gas giants, ice giants, dwarf planets, super Earths, hot Jupiters, etc.
We should be broadening, not narrowing our concept of planet as more objects are being discovered in this and other solar systems.
In a 2000 paper, Dr. Alan Stern and Dr. Hal Levison distinguish two types of planets—the gravitationally dominant ones and the smaller ones that are not gravitationally dominant. However, they never say that objects in the latter category are not planets.
I attended the Great Planet Debate, which actually took place in August 2008, and there was a strong consensus there that a broader, more encompassing planet definition is needed. I encourage anyone interested to listen to and view the conference proceedings at http://gpd.jhuapl.edu/ You can also read more about this issue on my blog at http://laurele.livejournal.com
You can find the petition of astronomers who rejected the demotion of Pluto here: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/planetprotest/
Post a Comment