A new planet?

[yanks1419]

2oo3 UB313, currently known as Xena, is bigger than Pluto and has a moon. The International Astronomical Union(IAU) is deceiding whether or not to place Xena in the category of planethood. Xena is currently 9 billion mile away, or 3 times farther than Pluto is from the sun. I think if Pluto is a planet and Xena is bigger than Pluto, why not make Xena a planet too. Not only is it round but has a moon. Its surface is almost the same as Pluto, covered with methane.<br /><br />http://pr.caltech.edu/media/Press_Releases/PR12744.html , many more websites have more info on this. Do you think Xena should be classified as a planet. <br /><br />P.S. if you want to learn more you can google search "2003 UB313" or send me mail at yankees_andrew41@yahoo.com and I will send you all the links I have about 2003 UB313.<br /><br />

 

[harmonicaman]

Hey; what about Sedna (2003 VB12)?<br /><br />I think the IAU is going to have to do something really radical. Obviously more objects are going to be discovered out there and this is going to create a mnemonic mnightmare* of unimaginable proportions.<br /><br /><i>In my opinion;</i> the IAU will be forced to totally redefine planetary criteria to conform to the new reality and it may look something like this:<br /><br />1. There will be four inner rocky planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth & Mars)<br /><br />2. There will be asteroids.<br /><br />3. There will be four Jovian or gas giant planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus & Neptune).<br /><br />4. There will be a Kuiper Belt and Oort Cloud.<br /><br />Pluto will be summarily demoted to just another KBO and the largest of these objects will receive a new designator such as mesoplanet or planetoid; Pluto will no longer be grouped with the other eight primary planets...<br /> <br /><br /> * A mnemonic farewell...:<br /><br />"My Very Eager Mother Just Sewed Us New Pajamas" <br />"My Very Easy Memory Jingle Seems Useful Naming Planets" <br />"Mary's Violet Eyes Made John Stay Up Nights Proposing" <br />"Man Very Early Made Jars Stand Up Nearly Perfect" <br />"Mexican Vultures Enjoy Making Jam Sandwiches Using New Plums" <br />"Many Visitors Eat Meat, Just Simple Under-Nourished People" <br />"My Very, Educated Mother Just Showed Us Nine Planets" <br />"Many Vikings Enjoyed Making Jelly Sometimes Using Norse Plums" <br />"My Very Easy Method Just Speeds Up Naming Planets" <br />"Many Vast Elephants Munch Jam Sandwiches Until [they] Nearly Pop" <br />"Many Very Early Men Just Sat Under Neath Pluto" <br />"Mom Visits Every Monday, Just Stays Until Noon, Period" <br />"My Very Excellent Mother Just Stores Up Nine Planets" <br />"My Very Excellent Mother Just Served Us Nine Pizzas" <br />"My Very Educated Mother Just Served Us Nine Pizza-Pies" <br />

 

[summoner]

I agree with you right up until you said that they would demote Pluto. I don't think that will happen, even if they were to find a KBO larger than Pluto. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> <br /><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" style="width:271px;background-color:#FFF;border:1pxsolid#999"><tr><td colspan="2"><div style="height:35px"><img src="http://banners.wunderground.com/weathersticker/htmlSticker1/language/www/US/MT/Three_Forks.gif" alt="" height="35" width="271" style="border:0px" /></div>

 

[mikeemmert]

They're going to <font color="red">have <font color="white">to "demote" Pluto. Sorry about the mnemonics and all, but Pluto just isn't a planet.<br /><br />I think IAU is delaying this soley so New Horizons can make it off the ground. Once in flight, it would be hard to stop it. Until launch, the plutonium makes it an easy target for some luddite religious fanatic with an obsession with WMD's and a desire to overthrow science and replace it with that old time religion.<br /><br />Similarly, another observation which should have been annouced by now (from the link provided by YANKS1419):<br /><br /><font color="yellow">"Further observations of the moon with NASA's Hubble Space Telescope, planned for November and December, will allow Brown and his colleagues to pin down Gabrielle's exact orbit around Xena. With that data, they will be able to calculate Xena's mass, using a formula first devised some 300 years ago by Isaac Newton. " <font color="white"><br /><br />I'm very much on the edge of my seat over this. Thanks for the information, YANKS1419. I notice you're a quark. I will be coming back to edit this post in a few minutes to provide some previous posts on the subject.<br /><br /> IAU looking to decide if 2003 UB313 is a major planet <br />Fun thread: name Pluto's moons! <br />Two more moons discovered orbiting Pluto <br />2003 UB 313 is the lost moon of Triton <br />POLL: How many Planets in our Solar System <br />Scientists Discover 10th Planet's Moon <br />Kuiper body cigar shaped, size of Pluto <br />Name the 10th Planet <br />NewScientist artical on Sedna <br />Case Of Sedna's Missing Moon: Solved! <br />More on the "Planet X" controversy. <br />Cryovolcanism on Quaoar? <br />Hunt For Shadowy Kuiper Belt Objects All Set</font></font></font></font>

 

[bonzelite]

why is Pluto not a planet just because it is farther away? who cares? --it is round, has 3 moons, and orbits the sun. what is it, then, the Michelin man? <br /><br />and what happens when they find a KBO that is larger than Mercury, has moons, and orbits the sun, too? what is that? a Barbie doll?

 

[yanks1419]

Xena is larger than Pluto has a moon also and Pluto may not have three moons. They might be moons of Pluto, no one said they WERE moons of Pluto.<br />And Mercury is different because it is farther away from an asteroid belt and it is close to the Earth. And since it is close to the Earth, therefore it makes it easier to study it.

 

[mikeemmert]

Here's an article on the two newly discovered moons of Pluto, bringing the total to three:<br /><br />http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/051031_pluto_moons.html

 

[mikeemmert]

Maybe the best way to look at that is to examine why Ceres was "demoted".<br /><br />Ceres is the largest object in the asteroid belt. Three other large asteroids were discovered very shortly. These were pretty much the same size. Vesta was at first thought to be slightly larger, but it turned out that it was considerably more reflective, which makes it seem larger than it is. But the sizes were close.<br /><br />When they started finding others, it was discovered that there was a fairly smooth distribution in the size range. It was thought that distinguishing Ceres as being a planet and ranking it with a rock less than a millimeter in diameter wasn't such a good idea.<br /><br />The situation may very well be different in the Kuiper Belt. It appears (to me anyway) that there are four large objects associated with the Sun/Neptune Lagrange points and then a separate population which has similar orbits and then another separate population which has a size distribution similar to the asteroid belt.<br /><br />The joker/wild card here for that word "round" is 2003 EL61, which is not round but is a Jacobian ellipsoid that may be twice as long as it is wide. That's because of it's extremely rapid spin.<br /><br />I'd put Pluto in a separate class - a Lagrangian. Unfortunately, there are three others, one of which was captured by Neptune as a moon and one of which is larger than Pluto.<br /><br />Why can't we have such a separate category? It puts the objects in a unique class where they belong.<br /><br />Or are you willing to promote Ceres back to being a planet? That may or may not be a valid viewpoint, I don't know...what do you think?

 

[cuddlyrocket]

Any object in orbit around a star and for which gravity dominates in determining its shape (i.e. it has enough mass so that it has to be roughly spherical) should be designated a planet.<br /><br />That would include Pluto, 'Xena' and Ceres, and a few others.

 

[bonzelite]

ok. Ceres. isn't that the big cigar-looking thing? doesn't it have a satellite? or, if not Ceres, there are many asteroids that have moons. i mean, my reasoning is simpler than getting into lagrangian hair-splitting and orbital plane analysis:<br /><br />i agree with the above post. if it's round and big, it's a planet. simple. i don't care how far away it is. if it has a spheroid or oblated spheroid shape, and it's big enough to be gravitationally shaped that way --it's a planet. <br /><br />the recent micro-analysis of the issue in news articles and on forums is making a mountain of a molehill. why can't we simply live with the evolving picture of our cosmos and tally up as many planets as we need? what aim is served to demote Pluto to "merely" a KBO and then promote Xena or Sedna or Qauaroar or whatever it is called to planets? we're still adding planets. <br /><br />and what use is it to relegate KBOs, even if they are larger than Pluto or Mercury or even Mars, to non-planets? why can't you just say "this is planet Pluto, located in the Kuiper Belt region." what is so hard about that? "this is Venus, an inner planet." "this is Neptune, a gas giant beyond Saturn but before Pluto." "this is Sedna, a very distant K-planet." <br /><br />i am of the belief that the general public does not give one rats about "KBOs." they don't even know what it is. therefore, to keep the growing number of planets as only "KBOs" will effectively keep the general public from caring or even knowing about MORE planets. why? because they respond and come running to dinner when you say "Planet." they understand that. <br /><br />isn't that the aim of science? to reach the general population and not just the elitist esoteric hierarchy of holy priests and nuns and demi-gods of "Science?" --sequestered in their high and undecipherable jargon? <br /><br /><br /><br />

 

[formulaterp]

I have a number of questions:<br /><br />mikeemmert <br /><font color="yellow"> I think IAU is delaying this soley so New Horizons can make it off the ground. Once in flight, it would be hard to stop it.</font><br /><br />What does that have to do with anything? The IAU isn't NASA. <br /><br />YANKS1419<br /><font color="yellow">Pluto may not have three moons. They might be moons of Pluto, no one said they WERE moons of Pluto.</font><br /><br />Then what are they? <br /><br />mikeemmert<br /><font color="yellow">It appears (to me anyway) that there are four large objects associated with the Sun/Neptune Lagrange points</font><br /><br />Which 4 objects are you referring to, and which Lagrange points?<br /><br /><br /><br />

 

[smartie]

The problem we have about determining whether something is a planet or not goes deeper than we all think. From an early age we are taught to think in a purely 'logical' way ie black and white, right and wrong, good and bad, etc. Humans tend to put everything into boxes. The real world, which is fractal in nature uses 'fuzzy logic' so instead of black and white we have many shades of grey, instead of right or wrong, we have more wrong or more right than someone else. Everything in nature from gender to planets is more fuzzy than most people appreiciate. Another example is the half pint. Is it half empty or half full? With our logical thinking we end up with a paradox for it is both of these it is both half full and half empty at the same time. We should appreicate natures fuzzy ways and take this in to account in our descriptions and talk in terms of degrees of something. We can say one body may be more planet like than another but nothing is really100% a planet. For 100% is perfection... which can not be attained. <br /> I suppose the best we can do is produce a planet scale with one end using the Moon 0% as a reference and the other end of the scale using Jupiter 100% We could then say Earth is 28% a planet. (I guessed that but you know what I mean)<br /> Oh my beer glass is 50% between full and empty so whose round is it?<br />

 

[yanks1419]

<font color="yellow">YANKS1419 <br />Pluto may not have three moons. They might be moons of Pluto, no one said they WERE moons of Pluto.</font><br /><br />Then what are they? <br /><br /><font color="red">"The moons are catalogued as S/2005 P1 and S/2005 P2 for now. Once they are confirmed, the discoverers will suggest names, to be approved by the International Astronomical Union."</font> http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/051031_pluto_moons.html <br /><font color="blue">The candidate moons are not stated to be moons of Pluto but are going to be observed until the IAU is definite they are moons.</font><br />

 

[yanks1419]

<font color="red">yeah</font>...... <font color="yellow">yeah but then..........</font><font color="blue">actually that isn't a bad idea CuddlyRocket</font> That would actually be very cool to have about eight other planets in our galaxy.

 

[formulaterp]

Regardless of whether they have names or not, the space.com link you provided, refers to the 2 objects as "moons" about 12 different times. They are moons.<br /><br />And by the way, astronomers have discovered over 150 other planets in our galaxy.

 

[bonzelite]

<font color="yellow"><br /> We can say one body may be more planet like than another but nothing is really100% a planet. For 100% is perfection... which can not be attained. </font><br /><br />see. this kind of thinking is exactly the kind of pseudo-intellectual nonsense that i'm talking about. and then in other posts, some people want to deny that Pluto has 3 moons? why?! every time they go to Jupiter or Saturn, they find twenty more moons. why is Pluto any different?! it has been largely an enigmatic body as it is so far away. so it would make sense that new things will be discovered about it the more sensitive the observations become. <br /><br />so why can't new moons be allowed to orbit Pluto when they are probably there? they find extrasolar planets all of the time --but newly discovered moons at Pluto: ee-gads! no way, man. that is just too out of the box and verboten. 100 push-ups for you! go wash your mouth out with soap! <br /><br /><br /><br />

 

[yanks1419]

"The moons are catalogued as S/2005 P1 and S/2005 P2 for now. Once they are CONFIRMED, the discoverers will suggest names, to be approved by the International Astronomical Union." The candidate moons are <font color="orange">not stated to be moons of Pluto</font>but are going to be OBSERVED until the IAU is DEFINITE they are moons.<br />I don't care how many times the article told you they were moons. I will believe they are definite moons of Pluto when they say they are <font color="orange">DEFINITE</font>moons of Pluto. The planets part you stated is propably right but we can't just say that everything that has a moon, is a planet. Aren't there some asteroids that have moons orbiting them. Doesn't mean that just because there is a moon orbiting the asteroid, turns it into a planet.

 

[bonzelite]

nobody is saying that anything and everything with moons is a planet. YES there are chunks of rocks with moons. but they are not planets. <br /><br />even if Pluto had no moons, this does not necessarily disqualify it from planethood. yes it is a KBO. ok fine. then we either decide that KBOs are for some reason "not" planets, or they are. i don't see the point in excluding KBOs from planet status just because they are farther away. what is the logic in that? especially when some of them are going to eventually be discovered that are the size of Titan, Ganymede, Mercury, etc.. i think Ganymede is actually larger than Mercury. but Mercury still stays a planet. let's demote Mercury then. some moons of Jupiter are bigger than it is. <br /><br />it's not necessarily size as it is physical traits. my opinion. does highly inclined or eccentric orbits disqualify planethood, then? is that the big deal? and if it is, then why? well, lets take a look at....<br /><br />...the REAL reason:<br /><br />i think the heart of the matter is really that the anti-planet people are threatened and insecure over the whole standard model of accretion --- /> that is the REAL issue --they don't want to admit that maybe the solar system did not follow this nice, safe, airtight little theory of accretion and nebular collapse so neatly and wonderfully. they do not have the answer. they do not have the knowledge. they do not win. they do not pass Go. they do not collect $200. <br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /><br /><br />

 

[mikeemmert]

'It appears (to me anyway) that there are four large objects associated with the Sun/Neptune Lagrange points "<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Which 4 objects are you referring to, and which Lagrange points? <br /><br /><font color="white">Pluto, Triton, 2003 UB313, and 2003 EL61; L4 and L5</font></font>

 

[mlorrey]

if gravity makes it spheroid, and it orbits the sun, it is a planet. A spheroid circling a larger planet is a moon, and can be considered a terrestrial moon or an ice moon, depending on composition.<br /><br />Ceres, Pluto, Xena, and other circular bodies are all planets. A body does not need moons to be a planet, otherwise Venus and Mercury would not be planets, and Mars would be questionable given the size of its moons.... A planet does not need to be larger than any moon in the solar system to be a planet.

 

[bonzelite]

yes. very simple.

 

[najab]

<font color="orange">Ceres, Pluto, Xena, and other circular bodies are all planets.</font><br /><br />The IAU would agree with that statement - the only distinction is that Pluto (mainly for historical reasons) is one of the major planets and the others are minor planets.

 

[aerogi]

what kind of BS is this? Don't you English people have this nice saying "if it quacks like a duck and if it walks like a duck, it is probably a duck"... djeez

 

[jmilsom]

We've had the discussion on Pluto's planethood a number of times now, but to put my 10cents in again, I think a compromise definition is possible. I quite liked Isaac Asimov's suggestion of the name <b>meso-planet</b> for bodies of Pluto's size that are not orbiting any larger planets as moons. <br /><br />This means our solar system can have eight planets and many more mesoplanets. I think this is far better than calling them 'objects.' <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[kmarinas86]

Finally! A term that makes sense to me:<br /><br />Me so planet!<br />Mesopotamia?????<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesoplanet