Many issues have arisen from the debate whether or not Pluto is a planet.Some astronomers say that Pluto should be classified as a “minor planet” due to its size, physical characteristics, and other factors.Small solar-system bodies are objects that orbit the sun but are neither planets nor dwarf planets.Tags: American Econometric Economic Essay Growth History In RailroadEssay On Pakistan In UrduInternational Research PapersAcquainted With The Night Analysis EssayIllegal Immigrant Research Paper5 Steps In Critical ThinkingPersuasive Essay For Year Round SchoolPlanning A Dissertation
Metzger and his co-authors argued that the third piece of that definition does not match historical usage by scientists and should be revoked.
Neither of the two scientists who spearheaded the 2006 demotion are particularly impressed by the new paper.
This term was used interchangeably with "small planets" or even just "planets" up until the early 1950s, the investigators found.
The authors argued that the IAU's definition, which the group voted on during its annual conference in 2006, attempts to override long historical usage in the community.
These facts contributed to the long-running debate over whether to consider Pluto a planet. 24, 2006, the International Astronomical Union (IAU), an organization of professional astronomers, passed two resolutions that collectively revoked Pluto's planetary status.
The first of these resolutions was Resolution 5A, which defines the word "planet." Although many people take the definition of "planet" for granted, the field of astronomy had never clearly defined what is and is not a planet.A 2019 paper, authored by a number of distinguished planetary scientists, concluded that the argument made back in 2006, that Kuiper Belt Objects should be classified as non-planets was "arbitrary," based on their assessment of 200 years' worth of studies.The paper argued that none of the studies (expect for one paper) talked about the non-sharing of an orbit as a criterion for distinguishing planets from asteroids.That group is responsible for handling astronomical nomenclature.The definition included the requirement that planets "clear" their orbit, making them the gravitational big shots in their neighborhoods."We now have a list of well over 100 recent examples of planetary scientists using the word planet in a way that violates the IAU definition, but they are doing it because it's functionally useful," lead author Philip Metzger, a planetary scientist at the University of Central Florida, said in a statement released by the university. Planethood Debate Reignites]The new research focuses on how scientists over the past two centuries have discussed asteroids.Not all astronomers supported Resolutions 5A and 6A.Critics have pointed out that using the term "dwarf planet" to describe objects that are by definition not planets is confusing and even misleading.Resolution 5A also established two new categories of objects in orbit around the sun: dwarf planets and small solar-system bodies.According to the resolution, a dwarf planet is: A celestial body that (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, (c) has not cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit, and (d) is not a satellite [ref].A planet is a celestial body that (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit [ref].Pluto is relatively round and orbits the sun, but it does not meet the criteria because its orbit crosses Neptune's orbit.