Magazine readers to name newly discovered planet

[Krug]

Dave. "See up in the skies, it's Dave!"

 

[Kaodi]

Thinking Of Definitions...

If it were me making the decisions, and it should be, 'cause I'm just that great ( ) , then I would define a planet as *any* object that has taken on spherical shape by having sufficient gravity, without initiating fusion. The *exceptions* would be any object that is not large enough to initiate fusion, but large enough to emit light, making them dwarf stars, and any such planet that is in orbit with a larger planet, would be a moon, making the term moon really a category of planet. Thus, any object that was not a planet, but orbits a planet, would no longer be called a moon (thus solving the issue of tiny, miniscule chunks of rock orbitting planets being called such).

P.S. And anyone who complains about having to memorize the names of 14 extra planets (outside of moons) in our solar system can suck it up, because kids can still learn the Big 8 plus Pluto, because of its significane of being the first to be found in the Kuiper Belt.

 

[Aeric]

They should call it Planet X. They've been calling it that for years, why change a good thing?

And besides, that's where all the monsters come from!

 

[Aesmael]

I'm pretty much with Kaodi on this one, although the best scheme I ever read of also included the condition of being 'dynamically significant' to be considered a major planet, which puts Pluto into minor planet status where it I think it belongs.

Last I heard, wasn't the current thinking that this object would turn out to be smaller than Pluto anyway? I long for the day something bigger than Pluto is found in our solar system but I don't think this is it.

 

[tarchon]

I'm pretty much with Kaodi on this one, although the best scheme I ever read of also included the condition of being 'dynamically significant' to be considered a major planet, which puts Pluto into minor planet status where it I think it belongs.

Last I heard, wasn't the current thinking that this object would turn out to be smaller than Pluto anyway? I long for the day something bigger than Pluto is found in our solar system but I don't think this is it.

This is a different one, the first Trans-Neptunian that's probably larger than Pluto. I believe there are now about 7 or 8 total largish ones, Quaoar, Sedna, Orcus, Charon, the three new ones (all of them are pretty hefty), and it looks like there's one other larger than Ceres that hasn't been named. That 2000 km to 1000 km dia area is the range where roundness seems to start to be strictly enforced. Ceres is the biggest object I know of that's seriously out of round, at just under 1000 km.
Dynamic significance would be hard to judge objectively though, IMO.

 

[S'mon]

I wonder if it might have anything to do with the fact that he's the only American to discover a planet. Maybe American scientists didn't want "one of their own" to be disparaged in any way.

My understanding is that it was felt to be important that there be an "American planet", hence Pluto remaining a planet even after it was discovered to be 2 lumps of ice (Pluto & Charon) orbiting each other. By any reasonable cut-off between planet & sub-planetary body Pluto is not a planet, neither is the new one.

 

[trancejeremy]

I would call it "Dr. Zoidberg". Though I also think we should rename the Earth that - so instead of Earthlings, we'd be Zoidbergers.


Anyway, I don't think Pluto being a planet has anything to do with with the discoverer or him being American. After all, he also has seen a UFO (and had a reasonably strong interest in them), yet we don't see that embraced by American astronomers.

It's simply a matter of tradition. Most people consider Pluto to be a planet, thus it's a planet. If had been discovered today, no, it likely wouldn't have been considered a planet. But at the time (1930) it seemed more important than it probably is.

When something has been a planet for 60 years, it seems somewhat silly to change it, just for the sake of changing it.

Another good case:

http://www.songmeanings.net/lyric.php?lid=80134

(the lyrics to a song defending Pluto's status as a planet - "Pluto" by 2 Skinnee Js, from the last time a planet's definition was a big deal. )

 

[trancejeremy]

My understanding is that it was felt to be important that there be an "American planet", hence Pluto remaining a planet even after it was discovered to be 2 lumps of ice (Pluto & Charon) orbiting each other. By any reasonable cut-off between planet & sub-planetary body Pluto is not a planet, neither is the new one.

"it was felt to be important that there be an "American planet"? What, do you work for the Guardian?


Seriously though, I really don't think most Americans even know that Pluto was discovered by an American. Or care. Trust me, American scientists (and powers that be), don't go around thinking things like it's important that there is an "American planet".

And besides, we already own the Moon.

 

[Zander]

No (natural) nuclear fusion, bigger than Ceres, and not in orbit around another planet. Being near the ecliptic seems to help too. Several moons would easily qualify if they weren't orbiting planets already. I would guess that they'll make an arbitary cutoff at 2000 km diameter, which would handlily exclude Ceres (et al.), Sedna, and Quaoar, while including Pluto (and the new guy). There's not really any reason I know of that the Kuiper belt object classification has to exclude the planet classification. Obviously, the 8 inner planets are fairly diverse as it is. The number of 2000 km+ Kuiper belt objects can't be too large anyway.

I suggested a similar definition to the BBC News site yesterday, i.e. having a diameter of at least 2000km and orbiting the sun in its own right, not around a larger object. Unfortunately, the BBC didn't put my post on their page.

Personally, I favour the names Gandalf, Tiamat or Gilgamesh for the newly discovered planet, currently labelled 2003 UB313.

Those posting on these boards with suggestions such as Bob and Dave should bear in mind that Uranus was almost called George by Sir William Herschell in honour of the king at the time. So it would have been: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, George, Neptune and Pluto. (Neptune and Pluto were discovered later so they may not have wound up with mythological names had there been a planet George.)

 

[Turanil]

My vote is for Yuggoth...

I also vote for Yuggoth. Note that if enough gamers unite their efforts, this name has a chance to win!