Menu

Post image 1
Post image 2
Post image 3
Post image 4
Post image 5
Post image 6
Post image 7
Post image 8
Post image 9
Post image 10
Post image 11
Post image 12
1 / 12
0

The science case for why Pluto should become a planet (again)

Big Think·Ethan Siegel·27 days ago
#n2mz4aP4
Reading 0:00
15s threshold

In 2006, the International Astronomical Union — the global governing body for many official astronomical endeavors, including naming and classification — took a step that had never been taken before: they officially defined the term “planet.” This contentious move, which occurred with only a tiny fraction of the membership present, and notably lacked the contributions of many leading planetary scientists and planetary astronomers, put forth three criteria for defining what gets to be a “planet” versus a non-planet. It must orbit the Sun and no other body. It must be massive enough to reach hydrostatic equilibrium: where gravity and rotation primarily determine its shape. And it must have cleared its orbit, without a substantial amount of leftover primeval material from the solar system’s formation remaining in it.…

Continue reading — create a free account

Join HashtagPLUS to read full articles, follow hashtags, vote, and join the conversation.

Read More