Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To Pluto -- And Far Beyond "To Pluto And Far Beyond" By David H. Levy, Parade, January 15, 2006 -- We don't have a dictionary definition yet that includes all the contingencies. In the wake of the new discovery, however, the International Astronomical Union has set up a group to develop a workable definition of planet. For our part, in consultation with several experienced planetary astronomers, Parade offers this definition: A planet is a body large enough that, when it formed, it condensed under its own gravity to be shaped like a sphere. It orbits a star directly and is not a moon of another planet.

3 posted on 08/13/2006 6:00:53 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (updated my FR profile on Thursday, August 10, 2006. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: SunkenCiv
There was a program on the Science Channel on this very topic earlier today. The discoverers of 1992QB1 think that only the inner terrestrial planets and the outer gaseous planets are the actual planets (so there are only 8), and everything else, including bodies like our moon and the 4 largest moons of Jupiter, should be classified as other kinds of objetcts. The "Pluto as a planet" apologists, on the other hand, agree with the Parade definition, and that everything, including our moon, the largest moons, Pluto and Charon, and the largest asteroids should be classifed as planets.
13 posted on 08/13/2006 6:56:28 PM PDT by Pyro7480 ("Love is the fusion of two souls in one in order to bring about mutual perfection." -S. Terese Andes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson