The IAU screwed up their planet definition 13 years ago today, but we've learned that dwarf planets like Pluto are full-fledged planets, &, numbering over 120, the most common type of planet, ahead of giants & terrestrials. @AlanStern @DrPhiltill @carolynporco @plutokiller
-
-
Replying to @nasaman58 @AlanStern and
Is the moon a planet? If yes, you have a self-consistent argument that “planet” just means “round thing.” If no, you agree that the dynamics of the orbit are part of the definition.
3 replies 2 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @kchangnyt @nasaman58 and
Phil's got the historical argument. Coming from the modern planetary science community, yes, moons are planets. I usually call them "planetary bodies" but sometimes I slip & call them planets and don't feel technically incorrect.
1 reply 1 retweet 9 likes -
Replying to @LauraForczyk @nasaman58 and
Phil's historical document mentions major planets, secondary planets and minor planets. You're lumping major planets and secondary planets but leaving out minor planets as "planets." None of this includes the notion of "round." Also ignores the history of Ceres.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @kchangnyt @LauraForczyk and
1/ That was just one of many publications throughout the past 400 years on this topic. Until the 1950s/60s, minor planets actually were considered a type of planet. This paper documents when & why consensus developed to put them in a separate category:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0019103518303063 …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DrPhiltill @kchangnyt and
2/ A preprint of that paper is available for free download, here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1805.04115.pdf …
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @DrPhiltill @kchangnyt and
3/ The paper shows that the community forged consensus to not treat asteroids as planets based on their small size, not because of their orbit sharing. No specific size limit was set, but Ceres was argued to be large enough to be a planet. (Vesta to a lesser degree.)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @DrPhiltill @kchangnyt and
4/ So even though the community had decided in the 1960s that small bodies are not planets, we never forged a broad consensus on what the exact size limit is. We are *NOW* arguing (since ~2004?) that geological rounding is the size limit that is most taxonomically useful.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @DrPhiltill @LauraForczyk and
The fact that this wasn't a big worry UNTIL Pluto was demoted suggests that it wasn't a very crucial distinction.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Alan Stern is completely consistent on this. He says the moon is a planet, but I don't see anyone pushing the IAU to state there are 50-some planets in the solar system today.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.