4 ms·

This was interesting. If I am understanding correctly by the same "rules" pluto was determined to not be a planet it now would apply to earth. Quote from artic

This was interesting. If I am understanding correctly by the same "rules" pluto was determined to not be a planet it now would apply to earth. Quote from article "Asteroid 2016 H03 is proof that Earth has not cleared the neighborhood around its orbit. Therefore, under the definition of a planet vigorously defended by the IAU since the adoption of Resolution 5A on August 24, 2006, Earth is a ‘dwarf planet’ because it has not cleared its orbit, which is the only criteria of their definition that Pluto fails." "what planet are you on?.....trick question,you are not on a planet, youre on a dwarf planet:)"

valuearb 10y ago
No, this was written by someone who is sad about the redefinition of planet, and so wrote this mis-leading piece about what constitutes clearing an orbit. Jupiter, for example, has 100,000 trojan asteroids in it's orbit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearing_the_neighbourhood https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearing_the_neighbourhood I don't think the definition is clear, but one asteroid ain't it. I do like the idea of uberplanets.
- SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
  How is he even pretending? The definition (as I recall and on wiki) is clearly about comparable sized objects, and 100m vs 13,000,000m isn't very comparable.
anonemouse145 10y ago
I don't see a discussion of the actual technical definition. Only bad semantics. Wikipedia, in brief: "In the end stages of planet formation, a planet will have "cleared the neighbourhood" of its own orbital zone, meaning it has become gravitationally dominant, and there are no other bodies of comparable size other than its satellites or those otherwise under its gravitational influence." Note that this definition has to make an allowance for Earth, because our moon is "of comparable size" by some definitions, but it is also under Earth's influence. (Pluto and its moon co-orbit a point beyond the surface of Pluto so if Pluto is a planet why not Charon)

valuearb 10y ago

No, this was written by someone who is sad about the redefinition of planet, and so wrote this mis-leading piece about what constitutes clearing an orbit. Jupiter, for example, has 100,000 trojan asteroids in it's orbit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearing_the_neighbourhood https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearing_the_neighbourhood I don't think the definition is clear, but one asteroid ain't it. I do like the idea of uberplanets.

SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
How is he even pretending? The definition (as I recall and on wiki) is clearly about comparable sized objects, and 100m vs 13,000,000m isn't very comparable.

anonemouse145 10y ago

I don't see a discussion of the actual technical definition. Only bad semantics. Wikipedia, in brief: "In the end stages of planet formation, a planet will have "cleared the neighbourhood" of its own orbital zone, meaning it has become gravitationally dominant, and there are no other bodies of comparable size other than its satellites or those otherwise under its gravitational influence." Note that this definition has to make an allowance for Earth, because our moon is "of comparable size" by some definitions, but it is also under Earth's influence. (Pluto and its moon co-orbit a point beyond the surface of Pluto so if Pluto is a planet why not Charon)