Challenge Thread: Was Pluto our Ninth Planet in the Fourth Century?

[Vince53]

Speaking of which, did you know that George Washington didn't have all his fingers on his left hand?





Half of them were on his right hand.

 

[sjastro]

Maybe you're not trying hard enough to understand?

The difference between a complex subject which requires effort to understand and an incoherent subject, is an incoherent subject remains incomprehensible irrespective of how much effort is put into understanding it.
Your challenges definitely fall into the latter category; in this case conspiracy theories and anti-intellectualism in labelling astronomers as crooks.

The harsh reality about Pluto is that astronomers corrected a gross error in assigning Pluto planetary status at the time of its discovery in 1930 rather than Pluto failing the three definitions which define a planet as stipulated by the IAU decades later.

Pluto was intricately tied in with the mysterious 'Planet X'.
The origins of Planet X go back to the 19th century when astronomers found irregularities in the orbit of Uranus which could only be explained by the existence of some undiscovered planet.
The issue was not resolved by the discovery of Neptune in 1846 as there were still irregularities in the orbit of Uranus which could not be explained by Neptune hence the moniker Planet X.

When Pluto was discovered astronomers automatically associated it with Planet X but problems arose as the mass of Pluto was too small to account for the irregularities.
Planet X disappeared all together by the 1990s when the Voyager 2 probe found the irregularities were due to an over estimation of Neptune's mass.
If astronomers of the 1930s knew of Neptune's mass as determined in the 1990s, then Clyde Tombaugh's discovery of Pluto would never have been associated with Planet X and Pluto would have been classified as a minor planet or asteroid.

 

[AV1611VET]

The harsh reality about Pluto is that astronomers corrected a gross error in assigning Pluto planetary status at the time of its discovery in 1930 rather than Pluto failing the three definitions which define a planet as stipulated by the IAU decades later.

If it's so cut-and-dry like you're making it out to be, why did they have to violate their own bylaws to correct it?

In addition, are you familiar with the fact that this is a highly controversial issue?

QV please:

Stern, in charge of the robotic probe on its way to Pluto, said the language of the resolution is flawed. It requires that a planet "has cleared the neighborhood around its orbit." But Earth, Mars, Jupiter and Neptune all have asteroids as neighbors.

"It's patently clear that Earth's zone is not cleared," Stern told SPACE.com. "Jupiter has 50,000 trojan asteroids," which orbit in lockstep with the planet.

Stern called it "absurd" that only 424 astronomers were allowed to vote, out of some 10,000 professional astronomers around the globe.

"It won't stand," he said. "It's a farce."

SOURCE: Pluto Demoted: No Longer a Planet in Highly Controversial Definition | Space

You say one thing, Stern says another.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The difference between a complex subject which requires effort to understand and an incoherent subject, is an incoherent subject remains incomprehensible irrespective of how much effort is put into understanding it.
Your challenges definitely fall into the latter category; in this case conspiracy theories and anti-intellectualism in labelling astronomers as crooks.

The harsh reality about Pluto is that astronomers corrected a gross error in assigning Pluto planetary status at the time of its discovery in 1930 rather than Pluto failing the three definitions which define a planet as stipulated by the IAU decades later.

Pluto was intricately tied in with the mysterious 'Planet X'.
The origins of Planet X go back to the 19th century when astronomers found irregularities in the orbit of Uranus which could only be explained by the existence of some undiscovered planet.
The issue was not resolved by the discovery of Neptune in 1846 as there were still irregularities in the orbit of Uranus which could not be explained by Neptune hence the moniker Planet X.

When Pluto was discovered astronomers automatically associated it with Planet X but problems arose as the mass of Pluto was too small to account for the irregularities.
Planet X disappeared all together by the 1990s when the Voyager 2 probe found the irregularities were due to an over estimation of Neptune's mass.
If astronomers of the 1930s knew of Neptune's mass as determined in the 1990s, then Clyde Tombaugh's discovery of Pluto would never have been associated with Planet X and Pluto would have been classified as a minor planet or asteroid.

Even without knowing that the "missing anomaly" issue caused by the overestimated mass of Neptune wasn't real, the orbit of Pluto stuck out. It has the largest inclination of the "9 planets" (by far) and is in a 2:3 orbital resonance with Neptune. That alone shows that it doesn't fit within the group making the other 8 planets.

 

[sjastro]

If it's so cut-and-dry like you're making it out to be, why did they have to violate their own bylaws to correct it?

In addition, are you familiar with the fact that this is a highly controversial issue?

QV please:

Stern, in charge of the robotic probe on its way to Pluto, said the language of the resolution is flawed. It requires that a planet "has cleared the neighborhood around its orbit." But Earth, Mars, Jupiter and Neptune all have asteroids as neighbors.

"It's patently clear that Earth's zone is not cleared," Stern told SPACE.com. "Jupiter has 50,000 trojan asteroids," which orbit in lockstep with the planet.

Stern called it "absurd" that only 424 astronomers were allowed to vote, out of some 10,000 professional astronomers around the globe.

"It won't stand," he said. "It's a farce."

SOURCE: Pluto Demoted: No Longer a Planet in Highly Controversial Definition | Space

You say one thing, Stern says another.

Try reading my post again for comprehension purposes.
I pointed out the errors made by astronomers at the time of the discovery which were gradually uncovered decades later going up to the 1990s.
Stern argues about the IAU definitions of a planet in 2006.
Since you have brought up this post show us evidence of your ridiculous conspiracy theory that a certain number of the 424 astronomers that voted were crooks.

 

[sjastro]

Even without knowing that the "missing anomaly" issue caused by the overestimated mass of Neptune wasn't real, the orbit of Pluto stuck out. It has the largest inclination of the "9 planets" (by far) and is in a 2:3 orbital resonance with Neptune. That alone shows that it doesn't fit within the group making the other 8 planets.

Indeed Pluto is difficult to explain as planet.
Before the discovery of Charon, astronomers believed Pluto's unusual orbit was due to it being an escaped moon of Neptune.

 

[DamianWarS]

Was Pluto our ninth planet in the fourth century?

(Kudos to Bungle Bear for giving me the idea for this challenge.)

pluto was the same in the 4th century as it is now (except 1600 years younger). so essentially whatever pluto is now, it was that way in the 4th century. it really doesn't matter how it is defined, what words we call it, or if it's even known, regardless of what we call it pluto remains the same.

 

[Ophiolite]

pluto was the same in the 4th century as it is now (except 1600 years younger). so essentially whatever pluto is now, it was that way in the 4th century. it really doesn't matter how it is defined, what words we call it, or if it's even known, regardless of what we call it pluto remains the same.

Everyone, apart - arguably - from AV, have made excellent and telling posts in this thread. Yours is a nice (in both senses of the word) summary and in an ideal world would bring an end to it. Sadly, I expect it will still be alive and running when Pluto moves again inside the orbit of Neptune and AV's great granddaughter is posting in it, arguing that obviously Pluto is the eighth planet.

 

[pgp_protector]

pluto was the same in the 4th century as it is now (except 1600 years younger). so essentially whatever pluto is now, it was that way in the 4th century. it really doesn't matter how it is defined, what words we call it, or if it's even known, regardless of what we call it pluto remains the same.

Wouldn't Pluto measure it in Pluto Years (about 6.5 years) ?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Depends on your definition of "planet."

If you don't consider Pluto a planet, then of course the answer is no.

If you do call it a planet, there is a time, once every 248 years, when it slips inside Neptune's orbit and is closer for about 20 years.

So.... Depending on the timing, Pluto might have been our eighth planet for a little while in the fourth century... Assuming you count it as a planet.

 

[AV1611VET]

So.... Depending on the timing, Pluto might have been our eighth planet for a little while in the fourth century... Assuming you count it as a planet.

Didn't someone say it was once our eleventh planet?

So when the pendulum stopped swinging, it ended up our ninth planet.

Until, of course, the crooks said otherwise.

 

[DamianWarS]

Wouldn't Pluto measure it in Pluto Years (about 6.5 years) ?

I don't know, you would have to ask Pluto that (I doubt Pluto cares what we think of it)

 

[VirOptimus]

Didn't someone say it was once our eleventh planet?

So when the pendulum stopped swinging, it ended up our ninth planet.

Until, of course, the crooks said otherwise.

In your opinion, why was Pluto, as you say, demoted?

 

[AV1611VET]

In your opinion, why was Pluto, as you say, demoted?

No comment.

I'm on thin ice here and don't wish to get moderated again.

 

[VirOptimus]

No comment.

I'm on thin ice here and don't wish to get moderated again.

That tells volumes.

Its all a conspiracy isnt it?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Didn't someone say it was once our eleventh planet?

I don't know. Ask "someone."

So when the pendulum stopped swinging, it ended up our ninth planet.

Until, of course, the crooks said otherwise.

Not sure what crooks you're referring to (and before you get the wrong impression, know that I don't care either), but if they have the power to force you to say it's not a planet, that's between you and them.

 

[AV1611VET]

That tells volumes.

Its all a conspiracy isnt it?

As I said, no comment.

Well ... I'll say this much:

With one major exception, I don't really think they're conscious of what they're doing "under the hood," so to speak.

They're just following ... shall I say ... their leader.

Luke 23:34a Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.

 

[AV1611VET]

Not sure what crooks you're referring to ...

I ...

A ...

You ...

Nevermind.

 

[VirOptimus]

As I said, no comment.

Well ... I'll say this much:

With one major exception, I don't really think they're conscious of what they're doing "under the hood," so to speak.

They're just following ... shall I say ... their leader.

Luke 23:34a Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.

Oh oh oh, i know that one. Its Satan! Satan want lesser amount of planets… because reasons.

Sounds totally reasonable.

 

[AV1611VET]

Satan want lesser amount of planets… because reasons.

Or more.

Any but nine.