Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

pahroza · Sep 11, 2002, 06:38 PM

I thought you guys might find this interesting if you haven't seen it yet. I've been unable to find any additional coverage of this, which is probably because of today's date. Hopefully additional information will come forth shortly, as I'd be quite interested to know whether it will be visible with the naked eye. Let me know if you find any more information!

Here's the link to the BBC story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2251386.stm

Andreas

mchladek · Sep 11, 2002, 06:46 PM

Very cool indeed. I never realised Earth had a second satellite to begin with.

IUJHJSDHE · Sep 11, 2002, 07:10 PM

Very scary!

typoon · Sep 11, 2002, 07:23 PM

Pretty Neat. WOW Possibly 3 natural objects orbiting earth.

thunderous_funker · Sep 11, 2002, 07:28 PM

I'm completely shocked and terrified by the ramifications of finding out that we've had a second moon for almost 20 YEARS!!!

what does this say about the relationships between media--information--business--control????

wow, i'm speechless......

cdhostage · Sep 11, 2002, 07:50 PM

Haha lots of science textbooks are now inexcusably out of date. No way th\eye ac an say "oh it's ok that the number of moons around saturn is incorrect./": or that the number of toes a cat hnas is wrong oh wrongo! No, there are THREE FRIGGIN MOONS!

IUJHJSDHE · Sep 11, 2002, 08:10 PM

Originally posted by cdhostage:
Haha lots of science textbooks are now inexcusably out of date. No way th\eye ac an say "oh it's ok that the number of moons around saturn is incorrect./": or that the number of toes a cat hnas is wrong oh wrongo! No, there are THREE FRIGGIN MOONS!

HAHA, I dident even think of that!

arrested502 · Sep 11, 2002, 09:36 PM

I totally agree with you cdhostage, the science books need updating. I also believe they discoverred another planet beyond Pluto a while ago.

scaught · Sep 11, 2002, 09:39 PM

hahahah. we supposedly landed on one of those moons 30 years ago and somehow we missed seeing one of them for the past 20 years? hahhaha

IUJHJSDHE · Sep 11, 2002, 09:57 PM

Originally posted by scaught:
hahahah. we supposedly landed on one of those moons 30 years ago and somehow we missed seeing one of them for the past 20 years? hahhaha

Well it's very small

Jim Paradise · Sep 11, 2002, 10:01 PM

Originally posted by arrested502:
I totally agree with you cdhostage, the science books need updating. I also believe they discoverred another planet beyond Pluto a while ago.

I thought they were still debating whether that was a planet or not?

IUJHJSDHE · Sep 11, 2002, 10:31 PM

Nope, Not a moon.

Just junk

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...ct_020911.html

Ganesha · Sep 12, 2002, 02:05 AM

Originally posted by arrested502:
I totally agree with you cdhostage, the science books need updating. I also believe they discoverred another planet beyond Pluto a while ago.

The Kuiper belt objects are not considered planets at this time. In fact the existance of so many of them, may eventually cause Pluto to lose its planet status. Since many of the known Kuiper belt object share Pluto's 3:2 orbital resonance with Neptune.

Textbooks are updated all the time, many college students complain they are updated too often (since you can't sell it back after the update).

derien · Sep 12, 2002, 02:40 AM

Originally posted by Ganesha:
Textbooks are updated all the time, many college students complain they are updated too often (since you can't sell it back after the update).

It's a conspiracy, I tell you! I mean, I can understand the problem with some subjects (I majored in political science, which is not exactly a static field, after all), but others.... I still don't understand why I couldn't sell back that introductory geology book. I know we live on a dynamic planet, but tectonic drift is not exactly a zippy process necessitating frequent revision....

Cipher13 · Sep 12, 2002, 08:20 AM

Originally posted by arrested502:
I totally agree with you cdhostage, the science books need updating. I also believe they discoverred another planet beyond Pluto a while ago.

Most people don't consider Charon a planet... if you mean Charon, that is.

voodoo · Sep 12, 2002, 09:54 AM

Charon is the only moon of Pluto. As such I doubt anyone has ever considered Charon to be a planet. It doesn't even have a spherical shape. It's more like an misshapen asteroid orbiting Pluto. But you knew that...

anarkisst · Sep 12, 2002, 09:57 AM

denim · Sep 12, 2002, 11:40 AM

Originally posted by voodoo:
It doesn't even have a spherical shape.

What does its shape have to do with anything? The moons of Mars aren't spherical either.

voodoo · Sep 12, 2002, 11:47 AM

Originally posted by denim:

What does its shape have to do with anything? The moons of Mars aren't spherical either.

Errr... I think we are misunderstanding each other. Most planets I know are spherical. Moons are whatever they want to be. Charon is not considered to be a planet (except by some people cipher knows) because it's a moon. It's not even spherical. => definetely not a planet.

mkay.

denim · Sep 12, 2002, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by voodoo:
Most planets I know are spherical.

Or at least spheroid.

Moons are whatever they want to be.

Yes. A lot seems to depend on size and manner of formation. I've seen suggestions, BTW, that Charon and Pluto comprise a double-planet.

mkay.

M'kay! Drugs, drugs are bad.