 |
 |
12 Planets and counting
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: eating kernel
Status:
Offline
|
|
...Acording to Space.com
that means its now Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Ceres, Jupiter, Saturn, Ununes, Neptune, Pluto, Charon, and Xena
Whoo!
I never thought Ied live to the day that they declared 3 new planets
Linky
|
|
Signature depreciated.
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
You're getting ahead of yourself. This is just a proposed change. It hasn't been decided yet.
|
|
Vandelay Industries
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Uh, WTF? The definition is as follows:
"A planet is a celestial body that (a) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (b) is in orbit around a star, and is neither a star nor a satellite of a planet."
Charon is a satellite of Pluto, yeah?
|
|
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Administrator 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Charon did not start out as Pluto's satellite, as our Moon started out as our satellite. It was grabbed from some other body or was wandering on its own. It gets special dispensation because it did not start out as a moon.
|
|
Glenn -----
OTR/L, MOT, Tx
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Chuckit
Uh, WTF? The definition is as follows:
"A planet is a celestial body that (a) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (b) is in orbit around a star, and is neither a star nor a satellite of a planet."
Charon is a satellite of Pluto, yeah?
Here's a clarification on the definition:
"The new definition, proposed this week by the International Astronomical Union (IAU), basically says every round object orbiting the sun is a planet, unless it orbits another planet. But there is a big caveat: If the center of gravity, called the barycenter, is outside the larger object, then the smaller object is a planet. That wording elevates Pluto's moon Charon to planethood, an idea some astronomers have criticized."
|
|
Vandelay Industries
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: eating kernel
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Chuckit
Uh, WTF? The definition is as follows:
"A planet is a celestial body that (a) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (b) is in orbit around a star, and is neither a star nor a satellite of a planet."
Charon is a satellite of Pluto, yeah?
Pluto and Charon are close in mass so they are considered a binary planet
the center of gravity is inbetween Pluto and Charon
|
|
Signature depreciated.
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: eating kernel
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Art Vandelay
You're getting ahead of yourself. This is just a proposed change. It hasn't been decided yet.
There will probably still be 12 planets plus the 40+ other new plutons that will fall under the new definition! 
(Last edited by C.A.T.S. CEO; Aug 18, 2006 at 09:22 PM.
)
|
|
Signature depreciated.
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Man, how am I going to remember the planets now? Gotta form a new sentence.
My Very Educated Mom Can Juggle Seven Umbrellas... Nine Plates, Charon, and Xena.
Yes, she is one strong woman.
|
|
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by C.A.T.S. CEO
There will probably still be 12 planets minus the 40+ other new plutons that will fall under the new definition!
So there would be -28+ planets? 
|
|
Vandelay Industries
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: eating kernel
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Art Vandelay
So there would be -28+ planets?
52-12= 40
|
|
Signature depreciated.
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
That isn't what you said. You said 12 - 40+.
|
|
Vandelay Industries
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: eating kernel
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by hyteckit
Man, how am I going to remember the planets now? Gotta form a new sentence.
My Very Educated Mom Can Juggle Seven Umbrellas... Nine Plates, Charon, and Xena.
Yes, she is one strong woman.

|
|
Signature depreciated.
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Administrator 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: California
Status:
Offline
|
|
Never heard of Ununes before. Do they gamble there?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
I say keep the old 9 for layman's sake. The nerds can elect to continue their education when they are deemed fit.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|

|
|
 |
Forum Rules
|
 |
 |
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|