|
Published by C1ay 08-24-2006
| ||
| ||
| | ||
|
#1
By
TheFaithfulStone
on
08-24-2006
|
| Re: International Astronomical Union 2006 General Assembly Man, why they gotta be hatin' on Pluto? TFS |
|
#2
By
C1ay
on
08-24-2006
| |
| Re: International Astronomical Union 2006 General Assembly Quote:
| |
|
#3
By
cwes99_03
on
08-25-2006
|
| Re: International Astronomical Union 2006 General Assembly While I agree with the idea that Pluto does not fit my definition of a planet (largely because of the inclination and eccentricty of its orbit) I don't agree with the definition as is set forth above. I think they copped out. I don't think this definition is complex enough to describe physical characteristics of each body, but I think it is overly complex when it comes to (or rather lacking in definition which makes it complex to determine whether or not) the restriction of clearing the orbit. I don't know if I would put in the sufficient mass to overcome rigidity. I think that are enough other things you could say that would make it so that if it met the other parts then it would have to meet the spherical shape, and if it wasn't spherical, it would still be able to be called a planet. I also don't like that they limit the definition of the word planet to objects revolving around our sun. Hope everyone understood that, maybe my writing here is too rushed. |
|
#4
By
TheBigDog
on
08-25-2006
|
| Re: International Astronomical Union 2006 General Assembly I am suprised only that the orbital plane of the objects is not considered in its definition. The remaining 8 planets share an orbital plane, and this is to me very significant in defining them and their relationship to the solar system. Maybe at the next conference there will be Primary Planets that share a common plane and origin, and Secondary Planets (like Pluto) that are not on the same plane, and have a different origin. Bill |
|
#5
By
C1ay
on
08-25-2006
| |
| Re: International Astronomical Union 2006 General Assembly Quote:
| |
|
#6
By
InfiniteNow
on
08-25-2006
| |
| Re: International Astronomical Union 2006 General Assembly Quote:
![]() http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=5705254 | |
|
Last edited by InfiniteNow; 08-25-2006 at 09:46 AM.
|
|
#7
By
cwes99_03
on
08-25-2006
| |
| Re: International Astronomical Union 2006 General Assembly Quote:
Or in saying this, are they referring to any two objects that share an orbit but which do not orbit around a common planet with a barycenter within the mass of the planet. | |
|
#8
By
cwes99_03
on
08-25-2006
| |
| Re: International Astronomical Union 2006 General Assembly And now for some serious levity. According to the Washington Post today, 8-25-06. Quote:
| |
|
#9
By
TheBigDog
on
08-25-2006
| |
| Re: International Astronomical Union 2006 General Assembly Quote:
Bill | |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Article: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Article Tools | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Article | Article Starter | Category | Comments | Last Post |
| North American Union & the Amero | Turtle | Political sciences | 38 | 12-11-2007 11:21 PM |
| English the Official Language of the European Union | Robert Angstrom | German forum | 5 | 05-14-2006 12:31 AM |
| 2006 Winter Olympics | Turtle | Watercooler | 13 | 02-12-2006 02:08 PM |
| Astronomical logic for an old universe | TeleMad | Astronomy and Cosmology | 5 | 08-15-2004 08:00 PM |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:48 PM.













