Pluto’s been stirring up controversy since it was discovered, and this week things finally come to a head.
A new “scientific and simple” proposal to define the word “planet” will be released Wednesday and astronomers will vote on it next week. It is not clear whether the definition will settle a long-running debate on the status of Pluto, however.
Those with the proper credentials and their IAU dues paid up get to vote on the propsal next week, although its still secret if Pluto is in, out or grandfathered in but all those other Pluto-like objects are out.
But even if Pluto is smacked down, it won’t necessarily be out.
Boss said he wouldn’t be surprised if the IAU vote will be split in thirds, much like the opinions of the original committee charged with developing a definition. And he said the vote should not necessarily be the end of the debate. Future discoveries of objects beyond Neptune could force continual re-evaluation of classification systems and nomenclature.
“It’s not necessarily something that should be decided by a vote for all time,” he said. “Science keeps moving.”
I dunno, on the one hand, Pluto never made any goddam sense, and it would be nice to not have to revise the “My Very Educated Mother” mneumonic everytime Neptune and Pluto switch spots. On the other, it’s Pluto, you can’t just demote a planet!*
*Note: Reputable astronomers will not be taking these points into consideration. Well, maybe that last one, and possibly the first one, but I’m pretty sure they’re not too concerned about what singsong quasi-poem children learn to memorize the order of the planets.
omg! it’s CELESTIAL BODY CRED-CHECK HOUR!!
well, anyway it makes a nice change from the feminist-cred rasslin matches. GO PLUTO! GO NEPTUNE! TAKE IT TO THE CORN!! wooOOOOOO
Wow. I knew the “planet” debate was heated, especially in regards to Pluto, but to actually have a vote over scientific definitions? Who gets to vote? What credentials matter? IQ level? Degrees earned? Do you have to take an entrance exam? Granted, things in science often end on a vote, but they tend to not be definitive as this will be. Anyway, I’m more than a little leary of leaving science up to pluralism, even if they are just deciding labels.
The IAU has been arguing for awhile, then they put together a committee. My understanding is that the committee includes people who are a step removed from the regular astronomy movers and shakers because that committee already failed. Now all the astronomers have a week to ponder and vote on if they like the definition, which will apparantly decide how they are going to classify the shitload of pluto-like objects that are hanging around the same general area as Pluto.
Don’t worry, Jack, it’s mostly a semantic thing, and it’s hardly a FoxNews.com poll. And it’s also not particularly binding – if the vote goes one way but general scientific consensus in the next few decades goes another, then consensus wins.
Yeah, that’s what I figure. I was just a little worried concensus might be swayed by the vote, but now that I’ve read a little more, it seems like this is an OK arrangement (I did always like Pluto as a planet, especially because of Charon).
So long, Pluto! You’re too boring to have any adventures at all!
ARRGGGH!