Ok. Cheers, on further reading I see that Pluto's mass is only a fracton of the mass in its orbit and is in fact only half of a binary system with one of its moons Charon.
So you think the discussions and ultimate decisions are left up to who...maybe some bartenders? It's a scientific discussion...
Totally irrelevant. It's unlikely we'll be seeing any aid go to Pluto depending on it's status . Organizing and categorizing any heavenly body can get altered as new information arrives. Let's put it to bed.
So it's a debate between being a planet and a dwarf planet. Big deal.https://www.bing.com/amp/s/www.phil...bert-neil-degrasse-tyson-physics/amp/?PC=APPL
Funny. What decisions? Do you understand how arrogant that is? "Who decides".. Stuff is. Whether you, or your eminent "deciders" accept it, who cares? The only reason any of this matters is that if someone "decides" they feel entitled to just a little bigger piece of the funding pie, because they demonstrated just how "smart" they were... Laughable...
It "Matters" because new discoveries have forced change in a scientific understanding, which is one of the beauties of science. As human understanding expands and observation/experiment produce results these are peer reviewed and theories or documentation changed to reflect it. In this way future scientists have organized and agreed upon data from which to begin further study and the process repeats.
It isn't so much or not that Pluto is a planet, there is a bunch of scientist and astronomers with OCD and insist that the number of planets must be able to divide equally..
Every field of endeavor has words that have specific meaning within that specialty - defined such that those in the profession can more efficiently communicate. Carpenters and architects have a different definition for "plate". Those in medicine have different definitions for "tension" and "organ". Etc. These definitions can change. Agreeing on the specific meaning is an obvious step. It doesn't have anything to do with funding or arrogance.
International Astronomical Union (IAU)...they're a bunch of bartenders who meet each Friday during happy hour to discuss the status of planets...
With one difference, they have the best in HD telescope with computerized star gazing...(warning, looking directly at the Moon can cause blindness.)
Of course not. So the beg for more funding to produce more expertise was just what? gratuitous? Now, if Pluto had turned out to not be a planet but and alien spaceship, now that would be a revelation.... for sure, we'd want to make a lot more funding available.... But to quibble over does this rock meet my definition? Who cares.
It sounds like your position is: "You can study the solar system, but don't come to world wide agreement on what the words mean!" True?
Well, I suppose if we were actually creating that consensus, we wouldn't be in the position we are today, would we? But we aren't, actually, are we? Instead, we are publishing "research" that defends an assertion that changes the "consensus", right? So, instead of just saying, let's study the solar system, instead we are fighting about what can be studied and how. I find that ridiculous.
What is this "position" we are in? What the heck does "let's study the solar system" mean? Isn't that exactly what's going on? Are you aware that the classification of plant material undergoes change, too? Science isn't static.
A consensus was returned which added new criteria to planetary designation in order to avoid extreme complications created by the older designation as science did what it does and discovered things. It would have become pointless to have one hundred planets let alone thousands so a society of scientists in the field acted to avoid the impending clusterf@ck.
What’s rediculous is to say that, because we change the category of Pluto we no longer study it or study it differently. If Pluto showed different signs of relevancy to earth, that would affect how and how much we study it..... You might think that calling a body a moon on another planet might make it less viable for study. It doesn’t if there are signs of life sustaining substances on it for example. Your remarks incoherent and obviously politically motivated agasint science you know little about.
How convenient... Do you suppose that having "hundreds" of things to consider to be too many? It seems arrogant.
Then you missed the point entirely. The question isn't about whether to study something, it's the rational that if, by recategorizing something there is more potential for future funding justifications.
Well...let's just say you somehow adopted 100 new kids, would you have lots of fun naming them all and remembering which ones have had lunch? Would you have an easy time remembering what to call each of the thousand Cats your wife brought home or stop your crazy Cat Woman at 10?
Funding should be determined by relevancy not categorization. Changing Pluto from a planet to a dwarf planet has nothing to do with the funding of NASA, except in the minds of those who know little about science. Fortunately, we spent billions on esoteric machines like particle accelerators as an extension of quantum theory which aided in the development of cell phones, MRIs, radiation therapy and a host of other tools that have changed our lives for the better. Debates like this have nothing to do with funding. Let science decide.
Okay...then my answer is NO. Funding for astronomy (grants based on proposal) will not be affected by what things are called or designated as. The search for "Dwarf Planets" will take place regardless of what we call them or if Pluto joins the club, especially considering Eris is slightly bigger anyway. Just wait until we find one even bigger soon.
The fun part will be when folks start asserting ownership of them. As in, the rules for mineral exploitation will be different for planets, vs non planets, vs dwarf planets, etc. Of course, then, it will matter....
That actually will be a very interesting situation considering legalities are far from settled and exploitation of asteroids is already in the works by private and public entities. Likely the U.N. will need to put something in place quite soon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraterrestrial_real_estate
