Is Pluto a really a Dwarf? What would Grumpy say?
 

Today's the day when Pluto's fate gets decided. Is it a planet? A dwarf planet? Just a hunk of rock? Where does Mickey stand in this debate?

Story here and a ton of other places, too.

It's official. Pluto is indeed a Dwarf.

Will they update Snow White?

I thought he was a dog.

Crap. Now I'm going to have to learn Ceres, Charon, and 2003 UB313. Lame.

Now I'll need a new mnemonic for MVEMJSUN ... any suggestions?

Mousepod's Very Energetic Mind Jets Swiftly Upward Nightly.

Memorizng
Various
Enigmatic
Mnemonics
Justifies
Spouting
Usless
Niceties

Here's the Bad Astronomer's initial reaction. The important thing, I think, is that the whole debate is silly as it is an attempt to create a scientific distinction where none exists.

Another thing I've found interesting is that 90% of the people seem to, upon hearing about this debate, immediately think about having to revise that mnemonic. I never knew there was a mnemonic for it. It's been kind of like learning that everybody but me is in on a secret.

I've always been vaguely aware of the existance of the mnemonic, but I never needed it to remember the planets, so I never learned what it was.

I knew about the mnemonic (actually, I think there's more than one), but it's a shame instead of inviting discussion about how science works, how we explore new things about our universe all the time, or even how science changes, the focus has been on "okay kids, memorize a new list". That doesn't help kids at all.

Too true. It's a shame that in our educational system little to no value is placed on the actual process of learning. It's all about what facts they can spout off. Or more importantly, when they learn it and whether or not they can answer the question correctly on a standardized test. But I digress...

On kids shows they haven't included Pluto for a while. Science is so far behind Little Einsteins. On a side note, when we were kids we said, "your-anus." Nowadays it's "Yura-ness." Much less fun, I think.

I think it is safe to say that kids these days still say your anus. And the standard American pronunciation has been your-uh-nus so that hasn't really changed in decades.

In England, however, the historically standard pronunciation has changed in recent decades. However, the historically standard pronuncation there was closer to urine us which still had centuries of school kids in stitches, I'm sure.

After listening to a day of stupidity on the topic (I'll make sure not to watch the Colber Report tonight since I don't need to go through that again, it was barely funny last week) I just wish the IAU would leave it be since they are trying to create a scientific definition for a socially created word.

What does the Starship Enterprise and toilet paper have in common? They both circle uranus and wipe out klingons.

You pretty much have to pronounce it "urine-us", or "your anus", so the choices aren't varied there.

Considering that that particular planet was originally named George, its come a long way, baby.

And don't think of it as losing a planet. Consider it recognizing that our solar system family carries evidence of its violent formation, and that large round bodies like Ceres, Xena, and Charon, are closer to the millions of comet like formations in the Oort cloud than planets anyway. Yes, Pluto is a comet, or pluton, or whatever they're going to name them. It's composition doesn't change because of the name.

At the end of the day, Pluto is still a .... STAR!
 

In reaction to news today that Pluto was demoted to the status of "dwarf planet," the Seven Dwarfs issued their own short statement, read by spokesperson, Snow White:


"Although we think it's DOPEY that Pluto has been downgraded to a dwarf planet, which has made some people GRUMPY and others just SLEEPY, we are not BASHFUL in saying we would be HAPPY if Pluto would join us as an 8th dwarf. We think this is just what the DOC ordered and is nothing to SNEEZE at."

As Mickey's faithful companion, Pluto made his debut in 1930 – the same year that scientists discovered what they believed was a ninth planet.

Said a white-gloved, yellow-shoed source close to Disney's top dog, "I think the whole thing is Goofy! Pluto has never been interested in astronomy before, other than maybe an occasional howl at the moon."

And just to make it clear, that is an actual press release issued by Disney today.

Sadly, I checked.

Is it sadder that you checked or sadder that people would take Alex for his word (no sarcasam intended).

Maybe they were afraid you'd use it in an MA puzzle!

Doh! OOps! I may have let the cat out of the bag!

I'm dissappointed that we didn't bump up the planet count to 12 - one for each sign of the zodiac - I'd be pissed if I were a Scorpio. Don't these astronomers pay attention to their charlaten roots - Bah!

Yeah, and the fun of watching astrologers explain how their charts aren't thrown off by the existence of planets not previously known to exist. Of course, they managed to incorporate other previously known planets (and previously unknown orbital structures as well) so I don't imagine it would have required much effort.

I think the moon is the "planet" associated with the astrological sign, Cancer. So 12 planets would actually be too many. It's been many years since I did any charts so I'm hazy on the details. (I grew up in the flaky Sixties, what can I say?)

The original proposal was to call Pluto and other smaller bodies, plutons. But the word was already in use as a name for Pluto in French, etc. My suggestion would have been plutette, I think it works better than planette. But I'm okay with dwarf planet. Mostly I'm just highly entertained by all the fuss this has caused. Over-excited scientists are a hoot.

I had no idea this thread was so fun!

Go Xena!

Actually, I don't think I've ever known astrologists to refer to any planets beyond Saturn anyway.

Besides not being visible when astrology was devised/decoded, I think the astral bodies have to have some energy effect on the Earth to affect us humans in the astrological sense. So they either have to be massive, like Jupiter, or relatively close like Mars.

The Moon, being the closest, and with obvious physical effects on the Earth and all people upon it (via tugs on our precious bodily fluids) would be the strongest astrological influence. As a Cancer (with Cancer rising no less), I can attest to this.


My higher brain functions tell me astrology is bunk. My 46 years of experience with other human beings tells me there's remarkably something to it after all.

But Pluto never mattered in astrology ... and I doubt CEGA 1896 would have either.




Still, I'm sad to see Pluto bumped off the list. I'll never stop thinking of it as a planet in my heart.

I'm embarrassed that I have this information in my head but I can't remember things I need to know to get by in the world today...I remember some astrology books that even referred to some as yet undiscovered planet because it was needed so that two astrological signs wouldn't have to share the same planet.

But all that seems moot because your astrological sign is dependent on what astrological section of the sky the sun was in at the time of your birth. (The actual constellations have rather inconveniently moved a bit in the past several thousand years.) After that it's what sign was on the horizon (your rising sign) and then which sign all the other planets were in (the moon being the most significant because it's so physically close). Oh, and let's not forget you have to consider which house each planet was in (twelve astrological "houses" that relate to different aspects of your life).

So many variables is what killed astrology for me because it soon became obvious that you could come up with enough stuff that you could interpret it all anyway you wanted. However I still wonder why my very Virgo-ish friend turned out to have most of her planets in Virgo. And it seemed to make some sort of sense that my rising sign Libra and moon in Cancer were what made me a rather unadventurous Sagittarius.

And the aliens who abducted me said it was all bunk.

And of course there is no single astrology. Whatever you want to be true you can find someone espousing. You can find many who do make use of the planets beyond Saturn.

And the physical pull of the sun is aboug 175 times stronger than the pull of the moon (the tugs on our precious bodily fluids) so the sun would dwarf the moon I'd imagine.

Or you could realize, for a variety of reasons, that astrology is pure bunk, with no basis in fact. Just sayin'.

I must say, that possibility never crossed my mind.

My Leo Sun would tend to make me want to agree with you, Frogberto, but my Pisces Moon has modified my natural Leonine tendancy to believe the Universe revolves around me and makes me more inclined to follow a more metaphysical lifepath.

My mother, an astrologer, would have you know she planned me that way.:rolleyes:

California State Councilman Keith Richman is a moderate Republican and has tried to call attention to some of the stupidities of the state legislature.

In response to Pluto's downgrade he put forward this bill. Key parts:

He played it straight to see the response he would get from his fellow legislators. In the end he got 50+ cosponsors from both sides of the aisle.

Next he will attempt to legislate that pi equals 3. I bet he gets traction.