Well the sun seems to have its power tied up in protecting the earth with a big old crystal but there already is a star sailor scout.
Well the sun seems to have its power tied up in protecting the earth with a big old crystal but there already is a star sailor scout.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Pluto got demoted and Ceres got promoted. Strikes me as revenge for the whole Persephone thing.
- Location
- Volksstaat Hessen, Deutsches Reich
Also, reading up on the arguments made back then and still being made, also a fair bit of American jingoism. Apparently, some US astronomer recently complained about the fact that the possible planet that may exist behind Neptune is being dubbed "Planet Nine", because that would "diminish" the works of the US astronomers involved in finding Pluto. For fuck's sake, it would be Planet Nine! Pluto is not a planet!
Zap Rowsdower
Ex-cultist vagrant
- Location
- Bright lights, big city
- Pronouns
- He/Him
And corporate identarian jingoism; I've literally seen arguments from "We can't allow Pluto to stop being a planet because it would diminish the importance of the name of Mickey Mouse's dog".
xa na xa
A.E.I.O.U. - Antarticae est imperare orbi universo
- Location
- σ Octantis
The circumstances of Pluto's discoveries were a bit of a stroke of luck.
Powell was convinced that there was a planet large enough to perturb the orbits of Neptune and Uranus.
So he pointed his telescope where it would br plausible within the margin of errors of some calculationd.
First Pluto was estimated to be larger than Earth; but as the years went by the estimation got smaller and smaller and smaller...
Too small to affect Neptune and Uranus.
It was at the extreme limit at the capacity for detection of the instrument. It just happened to be at the right time at the right place.
One could say that Pluto "shouldn't" have been discovered until many decades later, not that much sooner than other transneptunians objects.
It would be interesting how the debate would have gone if Pluto had been discovered instead in say, the 1970s.
I don't think one should try to detract from the more legitimate arguments on why something should or should not be a planet just because some people make less good arguments for it.
When you get right down to it, it's not really over Pluto, but whether there will be a small number of planets, or whether there will be a lot of planets. On what kind of classification you think is better to describe something as 'planet'.
When you get right down to it, it's not really over Pluto, but whether there will be a small number of planets, or whether there will be a lot of planets. On what kind of classification you think is better to describe something as 'planet'.
- Location
- Virginia
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Brings up a side question - What if Makemake had been discovered in 1955?
Sandy River DL
(Verified Destroyer Leader)
- Location
- Lake Michigan
- Pronouns
- Her/She
Or Haumea. That would have been amusing, assuming they were able to notice the elongation.
The elongation isn't problematic though, it's a side effect of a very high spin rate. Even much larger planets would get the same effect if they but spin quickly enough.
As such, it actually makes it more a place of interest. After all that means we can study a large planetary type body with high spin speeds. What does that do to such objects? Seems like something worth sending a mission for one day, once we can get something to go fast enough to not take near forever to get there.
As such, it actually makes it more a place of interest. After all that means we can study a large planetary type body with high spin speeds. What does that do to such objects? Seems like something worth sending a mission for one day, once we can get something to go fast enough to not take near forever to get there.
Last edited:
Sandy River DL
(Verified Destroyer Leader)
- Location
- Lake Michigan
- Pronouns
- Her/She
That's actually why it would be amusing. 50's astronomers geeking out over it.
- Location
- Virginia
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Did 1950s astronomers have sensitive enough instruments to detect its oddity?
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ, USA
The 'streetlight effect' Streetlight effect - Wikipedia has a lot to do with astronomy, much as it has to do with all science. The metaphor is used a lot in the social sciences but is really a major control/limit in hard science.
'We' know that there are organisms that live in our bodies that do not grow in petri dish cultures so we have trouble studying them. It is the same with astronomy. If 'we' do not have the tools to study a phenomenon, 'we' have trouble studying that phenomenon. Or even knowing that there is a phenomenon to study.
Take Trojan Asteroids:
Jupiter trojan - Wikipedia
Trojan Asteroids Are in a Class of Their Own - Sky & Telescope
'We' are just starting to get the tools 'we' need to study Trojan Asteroids.
Edit 1.1: No they did not.
Haumea was not discovered until 2004 Haumea - Wikipedia. Charon was not discovered until 1978 Charon (moon) - Wikipedia.
The tools of 1950 were incredibly primitive by today's standards. Think of glass plates as sensors vs today's ccd/cmos sensors.
Last edited:
That reminds me, the next generation of super large telescopes under construction now will allow us to push observations of extra-solar worlds to new levels. Finally we should be able to get atmospheric analysis on the nearest ones.
Could be interesting to see what kind of gasses other planets might have in their atmosphere.
And such improved observations will no doubt let us further consider how to define planets in the future.
Could be interesting to see what kind of gasses other planets might have in their atmosphere.
And such improved observations will no doubt let us further consider how to define planets in the future.
Zap Rowsdower
Ex-cultist vagrant
- Location
- Bright lights, big city
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Interesting nothing, it's key to finding extrasolar life. Oxygen bonds too readily to other substances to exist as O2 in nature; it all ends up in molecules with other elements.
So, if we find an extrasolar planet with O2 in its atmosphere, that means something is actively breaking those molecules up and spitting out oxygen as byproduct.
If that isn't one of if not the primary driving factors behind interest in extrasolar atmospheric analysis, I'll eat my hat.
Oh they'd most definitely be interested in finding oxygen, but there are plenty of other rather interesting questions to answer as well. Getting a closer look on black holes for instance if one wants a spectacular example. But there's many many phenomenon out there where more resolution and brightness can help.
Though on a side note, if one only found a very low concentration of oxygen, one might still wonder if some kind of natural process could do it. So I think you'd want it to be pretty significant amount, not sure what would rate for that, but lets say 0.1% of the total atmosphere or higher for now? Assuming super non-reactive planets aren't a think, cause else the oxygen bizarrely could just hang around the planet not reacting... Though wait, that would be a pretty amazing discovery in and of itself, so I guess we get something either way. Seems kind of unlikely though.
Though on a side note, if one only found a very low concentration of oxygen, one might still wonder if some kind of natural process could do it. So I think you'd want it to be pretty significant amount, not sure what would rate for that, but lets say 0.1% of the total atmosphere or higher for now? Assuming super non-reactive planets aren't a think, cause else the oxygen bizarrely could just hang around the planet not reacting... Though wait, that would be a pretty amazing discovery in and of itself, so I guess we get something either way. Seems kind of unlikely though.
- Location
- France
- Pronouns
- She/They
Yup, that will eventually happen. Which can make one wonder why one shouldn't just classify it as a Planet and a Moon right now. But I like those kind of consistencies.
- Location
- France
- Pronouns
- She/They
Of course, the fact it will take 3 billion years to happen is worth remembering. And the moon seem to be an outlier so far.
Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Kind of hard to be entirely sure when so far we've mostly only managed to get info on mostly the large type of worlds. We've seen some smaller as well I guess, but those are in super tight orbits around small stars usually. So we've still got some real gaps in our knowledge base on planets.
Still, that's all going to be changing, as I noted a new generation of telescopes are coming up that will get us more information. But there's also a new generation of instruments coming up/just arrived that have about enough sensitivity to detect the wobble induced in a star caused by Earth type planets in an Earth height orbit.
So between finding some smaller planets around more Sun like stars, we'll also potentially have the telescopes to image them directly. I'll be much interested to see if it continues the trends we've seen so far, or if some new things will come out of this.
- Location
- Volksstaat Hessen, Deutsches Reich
No it will not. Because by the time the common centre of gravity would have been pushed outside the Earth... both Earth and Moon will be engulfed by the growing Sun Red Giant.
And the fact is, right now, the common centre of gravity is comfortably within the volume of the Earth. Personally I see nothing wrong with objects being able to gain or lose the status of a planet.
So far some searching around and Wikipedia can tell me, it will actually be that far away in a few hundred million years. So well within the life time of the Sun being its normal size still. So this change will happen while they both still exist.
And even I don't see anything wrong with Planets losing their status in certain cases, like say if they got blasted to bits. At a certain point something clearly just isn't a planet any more. I just don't personally like the idea that location and neighbors being very good determining factors for it. For me those are to trivial, though clearly others disagree.
PS, It is not entirely clear if the Earth-Moon will actually ever be engulfed in the Sun's Red Giant phase. Due to stars over time losing mass due to solar wind, as well as the Mass distribution changes due to puffing up to a Red Giant; a planet is naturally expected to gain a much larger orbit by that point of time. As such, last I heard it's not known for certain if the Earth will thus be with in the Red Giants surface. I think the best guess for now is that it will be engulfed by a bit, but it's probably something that still needs more work to be sure of it.
xa na xa
A.E.I.O.U. - Antarticae est imperare orbi universo
- Location
- σ Octantis
The Pluto-Charon system is a double (dwarf) planet. (^_-)
Yes they did. Technically.
(I don't like laughing at earlier eras so-called "primitivity"; more often than not it's just amazing how much they did with what they had)
The earliest precovery date for Haumea is 1954, and 1955 for Makemake.
Bur there is more to discovering something than threshold sensitivity.
Even in 1930, Clyde Tombaugh's telescope was good enough to see two objects beyond Neptune: Pluto and Makemake.
However, Makemake was at the time in a position near the Milky Way. The density of background stars would have made Makemake very hard to discern against the clutter.
In the streetlight metaphor, it's like not looking in a spot because there are too many lamps!
This metaphor can be extended further though.
Each streetlight can represent the theoretical framework or mood of a period. People then move on to the next streetlight when new ideas arrive.
Here, Percival Lowell is someone stubbornly continuing to dwell under a light, when mainstream astronomers have already moved on to the next lamp down the street.
His paradigm was 19th century, hoping to detect Planet X the same way Uranus and Neptune were detected. Or how perturbations of Mercury's orbit led to suppositions of an inner planet closer to the Sun ("Vulcan").
But as the 20th century went on, new theories like relativity explained Mercury's orbital discrepancies, and made things like the Vulcan hypothesis superfluous.
It's only because Lowell was a fringe theorist (remember he was the biggest "Mars canals" proponent) that bequested his fortune after his death in 1916 that there was any effort in finding Planet X.
Without the private money of a left behind eccentric, Pluto would not have been discovered until decades later. (maybe the 50s or 60s at the earliest, almost certainly by the 90s at the latest)
I guess it's an example of how you still can get good experimental results from bad theories and hypotheses. You might find something interesting under the wrong streetlight, even if it's not the keys you are looking for.
Yes they did. Technically.
(I don't like laughing at earlier eras so-called "primitivity"; more often than not it's just amazing how much they did with what they had)
The earliest precovery date for Haumea is 1954, and 1955 for Makemake.
Bur there is more to discovering something than threshold sensitivity.
Even in 1930, Clyde Tombaugh's telescope was good enough to see two objects beyond Neptune: Pluto and Makemake.
However, Makemake was at the time in a position near the Milky Way. The density of background stars would have made Makemake very hard to discern against the clutter.
In the streetlight metaphor, it's like not looking in a spot because there are too many lamps!
This metaphor can be extended further though.
Each streetlight can represent the theoretical framework or mood of a period. People then move on to the next streetlight when new ideas arrive.
Here, Percival Lowell is someone stubbornly continuing to dwell under a light, when mainstream astronomers have already moved on to the next lamp down the street.
His paradigm was 19th century, hoping to detect Planet X the same way Uranus and Neptune were detected. Or how perturbations of Mercury's orbit led to suppositions of an inner planet closer to the Sun ("Vulcan").
But as the 20th century went on, new theories like relativity explained Mercury's orbital discrepancies, and made things like the Vulcan hypothesis superfluous.
It's only because Lowell was a fringe theorist (remember he was the biggest "Mars canals" proponent) that bequested his fortune after his death in 1916 that there was any effort in finding Planet X.
Without the private money of a left behind eccentric, Pluto would not have been discovered until decades later. (maybe the 50s or 60s at the earliest, almost certainly by the 90s at the latest)
I guess it's an example of how you still can get good experimental results from bad theories and hypotheses. You might find something interesting under the wrong streetlight, even if it's not the keys you are looking for.
- Location
- France
- Pronouns
- She/They
The video I linked goes into the math and ends up with 3 billion years, roughly.
Yeah, that's true, you can rarely go truly wrong by gathering more data.
Edit: more fuel for the fire:
Star that stopped being a star
This star stopped being a star, but not by extinguishing its fusion material naturally. Instead, it got stolen by another star when it was in red star stage, turning itself into something that isn't quite a star anymore since fusion stopped, but isn't really a planet by any planetary formation models. It's just a big cloud of gas.
Last edited:
I saw that, yes. Though his calculations make the assumptions believe that the rate of moving away won't change. Elsewhere I found suggestions in the hundreds of millions of years range. So I went with that, assuming they sourced it from something that made a more complete analysis. But that could of course be not the case and it just being another rough estimate.
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ, USA
As I'm that old, I do not laugh at the 'primitive' equipment that 'we'* used back then. I glory in the progress 'we'* have made. * Collective 'we'.
Edit 1.0: Snow drifts this high, uphill both directions.
Edit 2.0: The rate of tech change was low by today's standards. The change between 1950's and 1960's tech was impressive at the time. From a 2018 prospective I have trouble remembering the difference. Switching between large glass plates to try and see if any little points of light had moved was high tech at the time.
Last edited: