Turtle Posted July 30, 2005 Report Share Posted July 30, 2005 http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/29jul_planetx.htm This is very cool! I have to see what name it gets. C1ay 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chacmool Posted July 30, 2005 Report Share Posted July 30, 2005 Very exciting indeed! Any guesses on the new name? I hope the follow the naming pattern of the other planets, and give it the name of a Roman god/goddess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted July 30, 2005 Report Share Posted July 30, 2005 Thanks for posting that, Turtle. I have posted the entire release here along with an illustration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted August 4, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 4, 2005 ___It seems naming this planet is a little harder than it may seem; moreover, is it a "planet" at all? This question of what constitutes a planet is rather a large debate now, & a key argument is that "planet" is a cultural term & not a scientific one. Read more here:http://space.com/scienceastronomy/050802_planet_definition.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aki Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 Is this new 10th planet the same as Planet X? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CraigD Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 I think Mike Brown’s right, and we'd best get out of the habit of counting planets beyond Neptune. Pluto/Charon, 90377 Sedna, 2000 CR105, 90482 Orcus, 50000 Quaoar, 20000 Varuna, and now 2003 EL61, 2005 FY9, and 2003 UB313, AKA planetx – more and improved astronomy is almost certain to find even larger Kuipier belt / Oort cloud objects on a fairly regular basis. :) I’ve got a whimsical proposal for the definition of “planet”: An object orbiting the sun that is in turn orbited by at least on moon massive enough that a unaided human being couldn’t put themselves into orbit around it. Of course Mercury and Venus would be out by this definition, and possibly Mars, which hardly seems fair, Venus being nearly the equal of Earth, but part of the charm of whimsy is that it’s rarely fair. :) Seriously, Brown’s “big enough to be round” definition seems the way to go, provided there’s a rule against gravel piles, which can be pretty spherical under their own gravity, yet hardly seem proper planets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CraigD Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 Is this new 10th planet the same as Planet X?No. "Planet X" is a result of inaccuracies in the 19th century math and astronomy accounting for the gravitational effect of Neptune. They thought there was one more big planet, and hunted for it 'til they found Pluto, which wasn't nearly big enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emessay Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 Who is going to discover next 11th planet ? And when ?........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CraigD Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 Who is going to discover next 11th planet ? And when ?........Some think we’re up to about 25 already. In the last few years, discoveries of object close to the size of Pluto have averaged 3 or so a year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay-qu Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 10th planet? did anyone hear about that rock they named sedna? i thought that was gonna be classed as a planet, i guess not... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted August 5, 2005 Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 The distinction between Sedna and other objects is basically the orbits, I think. AFAIK this "tenth" planet has a more standard orbit than previous objects. Even Pluto's orbit is "abnormal" considering that it passes inside Neptune's orbit and also the inclination of Pluto's orbit is off quite a bit IIRC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted August 5, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2005 ___Besides Pluto's elliptical eccentricity, its orbit is inclined to the ecliptic 17 degrees.This paragraph is exerpted from the article I linked to in post#4: "Pluto is small, its orbit very noncircular, and it travels 17 degrees outside the main plane of the solar system where the other planets roam. In recent years, several other round worlds at least half as big as Pluto have been found on similar offbeat paths, including two announced last week in addition to 2003 UB313, whose orbit is inclined a whopping 45 degrees."___Why not "planetoids" for those below a certain mass threshold? :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddog Posted August 9, 2005 Report Share Posted August 9, 2005 Being this latest object is at about 97 AU, it is farther than the Kuiper belt and is likely areminant of it. Given Pluto's inclination to the Ecliptic of about 7 Degrees (relative to theorbit of the Earth's orbit), it is even possible that Pluto and Charon came from there aswell (though likely separately). The nebular hypothesis would have most gases freezeout by this distance except near cores (like metalic Hydrogen of Jupiter). So Neptunemay be the last Gas Giant for star the size of our sun (G2 V). It is with the discovery ofSedna that people have begun to rethink whether Pluto is even a planet. maddog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.