Definition of Planet to be Announced in September.

I think it's insane that there is no definition for a scientific term like "planet" makes Astronomy seem like a poor excuse for a science. Chances are I won't agree with the definition they come up with but at the end of the day we badly need one so any definition is better than no definition!

And, I'll bet it'll be easy to find holes and exceptions in the new definition :lol: Thery really need to make it water tight for it to be taken seriously.

Whats wrong with the OLD definition ????
Quote:
"A nonluminous celestial body larger than an asteroid or comet, illuminated by light from a star, such as the sun, around which it revolves. In the solar system there are nine known planets: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto."

It depends on the definition of an asteroid and comet, so its bigger then an asteroid! At what point does an asteroid become a planet ?

Whats wrong with the OLD definition ????
Quote:
"A nonluminous celestial body larger than an asteroid or comet, illuminated by light from a star, such as the sun, around which it revolves. In the solar system there are nine known planets: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto."

Here's the bit that's wrong with it: "larger than an asteroid or comet"

This definition provides no way of distinguishing between asteroids and planets. Is Pluto a big asteroid or a small planet?

When does a "big hill" become a "small mountain"?
When does a "rock" become a "boulder".

Only politically correct Californians worry about such pedantic semantic nonsense.

By the way nobody is "fat" in California any more.
They are now "horizontally challenged".

The whole debate is laughable.