Pluto II?

Comments

1. 

   August 2, 2005

   Tenner

   From what I understand, the sheer fact that Pluto is considered a planet rather than a measly TNO (Trans-Neptunian Object) is just convention. Most planetologists call Pluto a TNO, rather than a planet.

   There are likely hundreds or thousands of TNOs out there, they’re just too small to be observed.
2. 

   August 4, 2005

   Bob Waters

   Quaoar and Sedna are just two KBO’s of nearly Pluto’s size which also inhabit the Kuiper Belt. There is a movement on the way to say, “What the hell,” and make them all official planets. At the moment, though, there is no actual scientific definition of the word, strange as it may seem.

   Given the new object’s eccentricity (far outside the plane of the ecliptic, smaller than Pluto, yet having a moon), I suggest that the new KBO/planet-to-be be named Goofy.

   Nice template, BTW! 😉
3. 

   August 8, 2005

   Bill

   I love commenting on my own Blog!

   I think we’d get into a horrible mess if we started including all the Pluto-sized KBO’s as planets. We’d end up with a list the length of my driveway in 20 years.

   Other than historical reasons, the likelihood of finding so many plutonic objects in the future argues for de-planeting Pluto. Or, as another option, Pluto could be arbitrarily used as a benchmark for planethood. i.e., any orbiting body of plutonic mass or greater, with an plutonic orbital eccentricity or less, within the same orbital inclination or less, is a planet.

   It is a nice template, isn’t it? Thank god for WordPress defaults!