Crack use rampant among astronomers
Every school kid who didn't spend all his or her time launching spitballs at the teacher knows that our solar system contains nine planets: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto. And sometimes 'Y'.
But put down the straws and pick up your pencils kids, because that list may be about to get bigger. By hundreds.
The reason for this stems from two issues. The first is that Pluto is fucking things up for the rest of us. The second is due to the fact that members of the International Astronomical Union are high on crack.
When Clyde Tombaugh discovered Pluto in the 30's it was instantly declared a planet. Astronomers had no way of knowing until later the exact size of the object, only that it in fact orbited the Sun. Notwithstanding it's miniscule size and icy composition, if it orbited the Sun, it was therefore a planet.
When Ceres was discovered early in the century orbiting between the orbits of Earth and Mars, it too was declared a planet. That is, until they discovered it's a round chunk of rock about the size of Kazhakstan. It's round, and it orbits the Sun. But due it it's size it was downgraded from planet to asteroid.
Pluto is only marginally bigger than Ceres. Pluto is made of ice, Ceres is made of rock. Pluto is a planet, and Ceres is not.
With me so far? Me neither.
The clincher was when Pluto was later discovered to have a moon, Charon. Pluto would stay a planet. Book closed, everyone's happy, go home and get laid.
Fast forward to the late 90's. Those astronomers who couldn't get laid began messing around with the Hubble space telescope and discovered several round icy objects orbiting beyond Pluto, in a region known as the Kuiper Belt. One prolific astronomer, Mike Brown, who is in fact married, discovered several more of these "Kuiper Belt objects", two of which were named 'Quaoar' and 'Sedna'. Then, just to make things really interesting, he went and discovered '2003 UB313', an object even larger than Pluto, only with a sexier name.
Astronomers estimate there are hundreds more of these round objects beyond the orbit of Pluto. So what to do? Are they all planets? Or should Pluto be downgraded to something else?
This question is currently before the IAU, the governing body in matters such as celestial object naming, astronomical definitions, and propagation of the myth that wearing a cellphone on one's belt makes one look cool.
The IAU body is faced with a task which on the surface seems straightforward: is Pluto, and every object like it, a planet or not? The nerdlings and poindexters can't seem to agree.
Earlier this week a leading proposal advocated that Pluto keep it's planetary designation, albeit with a caveat. Pluto and it's moon Charon would become a 'double planet', and the asteroid Ceres would also be upgraded to planetary status. As well, Pluto's planetary type would further be described as a 'pluton', which would encompass the possibly hundreds of Kuiper Belt objects yet to be discovered. The number of planets in our solar system would immediately jump to twelve in this case (the existing nine, plus Charon and Ceres), with the possibility of adding hundreds more.
Proponents of this reclassification hail it as a progressive solution. I think it's gay.
Fortunately, a number of IAU members have put down their crack pipes in favour of a second proposal, which now seems to be gaining traction. Under this scenario Pluto and all the Kuiper Belt objects would be demoted to 'dwarf planets'. Not only would this cap the solar system at eight planets, but it is also keeping in line with the standard of having 'stars' and 'dwarf stars'.
Seems to make sense to me.
But put down the straws and pick up your pencils kids, because that list may be about to get bigger. By hundreds.
The reason for this stems from two issues. The first is that Pluto is fucking things up for the rest of us. The second is due to the fact that members of the International Astronomical Union are high on crack.
When Clyde Tombaugh discovered Pluto in the 30's it was instantly declared a planet. Astronomers had no way of knowing until later the exact size of the object, only that it in fact orbited the Sun. Notwithstanding it's miniscule size and icy composition, if it orbited the Sun, it was therefore a planet.
When Ceres was discovered early in the century orbiting between the orbits of Earth and Mars, it too was declared a planet. That is, until they discovered it's a round chunk of rock about the size of Kazhakstan. It's round, and it orbits the Sun. But due it it's size it was downgraded from planet to asteroid.
Pluto is only marginally bigger than Ceres. Pluto is made of ice, Ceres is made of rock. Pluto is a planet, and Ceres is not.
With me so far? Me neither.
The clincher was when Pluto was later discovered to have a moon, Charon. Pluto would stay a planet. Book closed, everyone's happy, go home and get laid.
Fast forward to the late 90's. Those astronomers who couldn't get laid began messing around with the Hubble space telescope and discovered several round icy objects orbiting beyond Pluto, in a region known as the Kuiper Belt. One prolific astronomer, Mike Brown, who is in fact married, discovered several more of these "Kuiper Belt objects", two of which were named 'Quaoar' and 'Sedna'. Then, just to make things really interesting, he went and discovered '2003 UB313', an object even larger than Pluto, only with a sexier name.
Astronomers estimate there are hundreds more of these round objects beyond the orbit of Pluto. So what to do? Are they all planets? Or should Pluto be downgraded to something else?
This question is currently before the IAU, the governing body in matters such as celestial object naming, astronomical definitions, and propagation of the myth that wearing a cellphone on one's belt makes one look cool.
The IAU body is faced with a task which on the surface seems straightforward: is Pluto, and every object like it, a planet or not? The nerdlings and poindexters can't seem to agree.
Earlier this week a leading proposal advocated that Pluto keep it's planetary designation, albeit with a caveat. Pluto and it's moon Charon would become a 'double planet', and the asteroid Ceres would also be upgraded to planetary status. As well, Pluto's planetary type would further be described as a 'pluton', which would encompass the possibly hundreds of Kuiper Belt objects yet to be discovered. The number of planets in our solar system would immediately jump to twelve in this case (the existing nine, plus Charon and Ceres), with the possibility of adding hundreds more.
Proponents of this reclassification hail it as a progressive solution. I think it's gay.
Fortunately, a number of IAU members have put down their crack pipes in favour of a second proposal, which now seems to be gaining traction. Under this scenario Pluto and all the Kuiper Belt objects would be demoted to 'dwarf planets'. Not only would this cap the solar system at eight planets, but it is also keeping in line with the standard of having 'stars' and 'dwarf stars'.
Seems to make sense to me.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home