Astronomer with disperate need-of-notoriety (let's call him Joe): "Hey, I've just found a new planet".
Astronomer with disperate need-of-funds (let's call him Jim): "Man, how can you call this stinky ball of rock a planet? Then my recently discovered UB-571a,23/cTNB44d (aka Bob) is also a planet."
Joe: "No, it doesn't, it orbits too far from the Sun."
Jim: "And your 'planet' is smaller than mine."
Joe: "But my planet has a satellite."
Jim: "No, it is not a satellite, because the center of gravity is outside the bodies."
Joe: "Aha! Then I just found two planets!"
Jim: "Uhm. Let's talk it with a couple hundreds burocrats from Europe and see what they say."
Joe: "Ok."
----------------------
Turning serious:
Let's them say what they want, Pluto is a planet for me. Do they needed to re-define moons? In fact, moons are of two categories: the ones which formed together with the planet (such as Earth's moon, or Ganymede, Io, Europa, etc. for Jupiter), and the ones which were captured by planet's gravity (The two Mars' moons, for instance). However, no need for a change in definition for moons has been felt by the IAU.
When I go to Wikipedia and see all the pages about Pluto being renamed and corrected, I think this statement of the IAU is non-sense.
"Do not follow where the path may lead. Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
(R.Frost)
-----------------------------------------------------------
"I support America. I support freedom and peace and any means that will assure us of both."
(Anonymous)
This revisionist mentality is frakin' lame. These egghead doofus' should try and, I don't know, cure a disease maybe? Nah, they would rather rub pocket protectors and re-classify planets. Now text books across the world have to be changed.
I think America should say 'up yours' to these nerds and keep Pluto as planet. We're not backing down to the metric system and we're taking back Pluto, SUCKAAAAAAAAAS!
08-24-2006 11:39 PM
