Let's talk about Pluto.

As most of us will know the planet Pluto was demoted not so long ago and it is no longer considered a planet. At the time this happened, i was thinking "They cant just demote a planet because they feel like it". I was annoyed that something i had grown up with as a planet was no longer a planet.

HOWEVER............................

I was reading a book i got for christmas and the info in it about Pluto and it's eliptical orbit around the sun (cutting into the orbit of other planets etc) and how as it nears the sun its surface is melted and the vapour replemishes its atmosphere etc................................does make it sound more like a comet (possibly an asteroid) more then it does a planet.

Your thoughts?

This caused a bit of discussion at the time.

www.irishastronomy.org/boards/viewtopic.php?t=4710

Interesting. To me Pluto will always be a planet but i can accept why it has been demoted.

How silly.

Is Pluto paid less now that he has been demoted?

When does a hill become a mountain?

The entire argument demeans Astronomy and invites sniggers..

Peter.

P.S.

The Greeks tell us that Zeus (Jupiter) regarded ALL the the other gods as a bunch of dwarfs.

By Jupiter's standards ALL the other planets are "dwarf planets".

Rediculous debate.

Peter.

The entire argument demeans Astronomy and invites sniggers..

Personally I have no strong feelings on the change of title for Pluto, but I would argue that this change is EXACTLY what makes astronomy a scientific subject.

The ability to review our current understandings and change them to adopt new evidence is EXACTLY what good science requires. From your logic, that this argument "demeans Astronomy and invites sniggers", reminds me of what was supposedly said when Copernicus suggested that the Earth was NOT the centre of the solar system.

If the AU can stand over their evidence for the demotion of Pluto then it's fine with me.