Great Planet Debate: Scientists Could Overturn Official Definition
The question of Pluto's "planethood" has not been completely closed. According to Jeanna Bryner, a Senior Writer with SPACE.com, some of the best astronomers and planetary scientists from around the world will convene in Maryland this month to explore a basic, but controversial, question: "What is a planet?"
"The Great Planet Debate: Science as Process" conference will be held from Aug. 14-16 at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) in Laurel, MD.
Two years ago, the International Astronomical Union (IAU) debated this same topic and voted in a new definition of planet that not only demoted Pluto to the status of "dwarf planet," but also left a bad taset in the mouths of many people, scientists and lay persons alike. More recently, the IAU has made a decision that calls Pluto and similar objects Plutoids.
There are some who hope this month's conference will fix what they see as a flawed system. A lot of the scientists were unhappy that the 2006 decision was made by just 424 astronomers out of over 10,000 professional astronomers around the world. The most recent name change did not help. Bryner says it "further ticked off many astronomers, who felt the term was developed behind closed doors."
She quotes Mark V. Sykes, director of the Planetary Science Institute in Tucson, AZ as saying, "We're going to do something that the IAU did not, which is discuss what we know about planetary bodies in the solar system and around other stars, and discuss the value of different ways of defining objects as planets and what that means."
We have been discussing the issue of Pluto's demotion in our forum. Laurele2007 says, "It is not the 'former ninth planet.' It is still a planet, regardless of what four percent of the IAU say, either the ninth planet or the tenth if you count Ceres. Please do not accept the IAU decree, which has been opposed by over 300 planetary scientists in a petition led by Dr. Alan Stern, Principal Investigator of New Horizons, as some sort of 'gospel truth.'"
The Great Planet Debate (GPD) conference kicks off with an open-to-the-public debate between Dr. Mark Sykes of the Planetary Science Institute and Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson of the American Museum of Natural History at 4:30 PM EDT on August 14th. The debate, which will be moderated by Ira Flatow, the host of Science Friday on National Public Radio, is free to everyone and will be streamed live on the web.
What do you think? Share your opinions either here in our comments or in the forum.
Image Credit: Dr. R. Albrecht, ESA/ESO Space Telescope European Coordinating Facility; NASA
Comments
Anyone who reads the IAU definition of a planet can see that it does not make sense. According to their definition, Pluto would not be the only “planet” to lose its planet status. However, the IAU only demoted Pluto….why? In fact, Earth should lose its planet status with their “new and improved” definition.
I don’t know about Cerus but I do feel Pluto is a planet and not just some ‘dwarf’ planet. Of course, I haven’t the education which all of you have but I am cleanly interested in science and technology and keep abreast of it everyday with the internet.
IMO even what we call the moon, the 4 largest moons of Jupiter etc should also be considered “Planets”. Sure “dwarf planets” doesn’t really bother me any more than the term “gas giant” or “ice giant”. There just categories of planets.
But the problem is that according to the IAU definition, dwarf planets are NOT planets at all. If this were reversed, a lot of the controversy would dissipate, and dwarf planets would just be a subcategory of planets, as you and most people interpret the term. As for moons, there is a tradition going back at least to the 19th century of calling them “secondary planets,” meaning they orbit other planets as opposed to “primary planets,” which orbit the sun. I have no problem with this designation though it’s likely that people will still colloquially refer to these objects as satellites or moons to distinguish them from the primary planets.
I”m thinking about edge of our solal sistem and thing that someune keep something obout same planet in secret,becousa its descovered not soo long time agoo,convense me if i am vrong,please!?
I attended the conference today and must say that it was an eye opening experience. Aside from the rather energetic debate (which I think wasmore energy than science), several great presentations were made regarding categories and definitions of “planet”. At the end, I agree with Dr. Tyson that the underlying definition of planet can no longer be limited to a simple, generic category. Our view of the solar system has evolved beyond the generic 1800’s method of categorization. It’s time to shed the generic index of planet or no planet. We can now see a whole new spectrum of objects. I think it’s time to shed the planet label and go with some real science. Don’t worry about the students. Give them some passion and they will take it from there.
Tis has become quite a topic my belief upon this is this it doesnt matter if we cant get to pluto its still a planet and so happens to be located in our solar system you cant just banish it and say its not a planet any more who are you to decied that.