The Pluto Problem and 2003 UB313
Last-minute addition:
They're working the Planet X angle, alright.
They want to name the object Xena.
First, if Pluto is considered not to be a planet by many in the astronomical field, then can an object that is only 150% larger and so much farther distant* be considered a contender?
Visitors to the Rose Planetarium in NYC will see that Pluto isn't featured in sculptural installations and diagrams that represent the solar system. Saturn's moon Titan is larger than Pluto. Our Moon is bigger than Pluto and the diameter of the latter is only half the length of the United States.
Isn't the idea that there's something dark and quite massive floating out there along (or, like 2003 UB313, above) the ecliptic? The real Planet X...? A planet that, to my mind, people are looking for in the wrong place. Perhaps the planet that so many have sought for so long was the object that orbited between Mars and Jupiter, the debris of which we now call the Asteroid Belt. I'm just sayin'...
UB313 is a great find, but let's not call it a planet. Aside from the comparisons and observations above, a declaration about planethood made in the middle of Mercury Retrograde period really ought to be scrutinized. Remember that line from the news stories: "a hastliy arranged press conference." Brown et al. wanted more time to review their data, but they were concerned that the data would be let loose.
Just nine is fine (and eight might be great).
Now, how might all this influence astrology?
That's for another time.
* "[2003 UB313] is currently 9 billion miles away from the Sun, roughly 100 times more distant than the Earth, and is now about three times more remote than Pluto. At its present distance, the Sun will appear so small in the sky it will almost be indistinguishable from other stars."
They're working the Planet X angle, alright.
They want to name the object Xena.
First, if Pluto is considered not to be a planet by many in the astronomical field, then can an object that is only 150% larger and so much farther distant* be considered a contender?
Visitors to the Rose Planetarium in NYC will see that Pluto isn't featured in sculptural installations and diagrams that represent the solar system. Saturn's moon Titan is larger than Pluto. Our Moon is bigger than Pluto and the diameter of the latter is only half the length of the United States.
Isn't the idea that there's something dark and quite massive floating out there along (or, like 2003 UB313, above) the ecliptic? The real Planet X...? A planet that, to my mind, people are looking for in the wrong place. Perhaps the planet that so many have sought for so long was the object that orbited between Mars and Jupiter, the debris of which we now call the Asteroid Belt. I'm just sayin'...
UB313 is a great find, but let's not call it a planet. Aside from the comparisons and observations above, a declaration about planethood made in the middle of Mercury Retrograde period really ought to be scrutinized. Remember that line from the news stories: "a hastliy arranged press conference." Brown et al. wanted more time to review their data, but they were concerned that the data would be let loose.
Just nine is fine (and eight might be great).
Now, how might all this influence astrology?
That's for another time.
* "[2003 UB313] is currently 9 billion miles away from the Sun, roughly 100 times more distant than the Earth, and is now about three times more remote than Pluto. At its present distance, the Sun will appear so small in the sky it will almost be indistinguishable from other stars."
The Pluto Problem and 2003 UB313
mr damon, 03:55
2 Comments:
an intresting find. but a planet... no. when the solar system formed via accretion disk lighter elements were pushed out and heavier elements moved closer to the center. the solar systems gas giants are further away from the center(sun) than lithogenous (rock) planets are. my thoughts on "xena" and "pluto" is that due to their solid state and apparent metallic compostion niether probably formed during the formation of the solar system and therefore niether are planets.-justin hampton. CA. SDSU
Pluto has 3 moons, as many as the four inner planets combined. It is wrong to strip an astronomy of his or her discoveries after the the fact, and, in this case, after death. This also happened to Giuseppi Piazzi's discovery of Ceres. Also, please note that the International Astronomical Union in 2006 did not have a quorum when it voted to change the definition of a planet without grandfathering Pluto. Namely, only 200 of 10,000 members voted in Prague. Pluto is a planet!
http://ultra-renaissance.com
Post a Comment
<< 22 over 7