Dan’s Blog (2.0)

Well Pluto got kicked out of the planet club today. It’s now a “dwarf planet.” Don’t they mean “little planet” or “sized-challenged planet”? The insensitivity of it all! Well, I will be sad to see Pluto go, and it will be really difficult to explain it to my 4-year-old. These scientists! They’re all about “a triumph of science over sentimentality” but do they have to deal with the emotional fall-out when you turn a toddler’s world upside down? I don’t think so.

Filed by Daniel Appelquist at 21:31 under Science

No Comments

Everything needs an upgrade once in a while. I guess it was the Solar system’s time. So now we still have Pluto [great sigh of relief] but … Surprise surprise! There’s a new planet you never heard of before making an appearance between Mars and Jupiter. I dunno — I prefer Solar System Classic to the New Solar System. I really only like the Solar System’s old stuff — you know, in the pre-Ceres days? And don’t even talk to me about Charon and 2003 UB₃₁₃. After that the Solar System really went down hill.

By the way, is this the best shot they could get of Ceres for the coming out party? I mean surely there must be something better in the press file…

Thanks to Scott for the “Solar System 2.0″ meme.

Filed by Daniel Appelquist at 12:20 under Science

No Comments

It seems to me that question of “Is Pluto a Planet” is not science. Yes, a single definition needs to be found and yes this definition needs to be applied to all future astronomical bodies we encounter going forward in order to know if we can call them a planet, but isn’t this is all really a question of semantics rather than, strictly speaking, science? It all seems a bit like arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Changing what we call something does not change what it intrinsically is. Pluto will not suddenly disappear in a puff of logic if it is demoted from planet-hood. Having said that, if a definition is reached for which Pluto does not qualify, I say grandfather it in. Make Pluto the historical exception to the rule — a quirky footnote of history. Not because ‘Pluto deserves to be a Planet” but because designating Pluto as such tells an important story about the history of astronomy and how humans’ classification of the world around them evolved. Is that so wrong?

Filed by Daniel Appelquist at 21:44 under Science

4 Comments