Skip to main content

Reply to comment

Re: Weintraub

February 8, 2009 by laurele, 41 weeks 3 days ago
Comment: 34373

The statement, "no criteria based on physical or astrophysical principles are sufficient to distinguish Pluto and Ceres from Mercury and Jupiter" is a quote from Weintraub, so I cannot take credit for it. But it does encapsulate my view that whether or not an object is in a belt, if that object is large enough to have attained hydrostatic equilibrium, it is a type of planet. If we use dwarf planet as a subclass of planets to indicate these smaller but still round bodies in belts, we would be taking both the location and geophysical composition of these objects into account when creating the definition.

As far as a personal interest, I have always been fascinated by the solar system, and as a writer, I believe definitions are important. I feel very strongly that the IAU definition is terribly flawed, best described by Jonathan Coulton's song "I'm Your Moon" (quoted in Tyson's book) with the words "They invented a reason..."

Some of it is a personal quirk. I am a person of strong convictions, and when I believe in and advocate for something, I do it with all the energy I can muster. Either that, or some of my friends' suspicions are right, and I really am from Pluto. :)

Reply



About us

Science Blog was started in August 2002. It lives, breathes and eats press releases from research organizations around the globe. Most of what you read here are press releases from the outfits named in the stories themselves. Got a news story you think belongs here? Let's talk. The other half of the equation is blog posts from readers like you. So if you have an interest in science, please register and join others like you in an ongoing, vibrant dialog about what makes the world tick. Meantime, please take a minute to read our Privacy Policy and Site Disclaimer.


Premium Drupal Themes by Adaptivethemes