I still think of Pluto as a planet. It was the last planet to be named as a planet, before they started getting cocky about it. I did read somewhere that there was talk of re-classifying it again as a 'Plutoid', I thought that was kinda cute.
To me Pluto is the most mysterious yet under explored planet in science history. Just by the Voyager's fly by we still don't know much about it and hopefully in 2015 we can with the New Horizon's probe. Still to me Pluto is still a planet despite being downgraded to a dwarf planet. Though I have to say it could have meet it's demise by a collision with another planet's moon and that is why the orbital behavior is out of the ordinary not to mention it's size. Heck the asteroid that hit Earth back in B.C. could have been part of Pluto and then there are some craters on the moon that some scientists say it occured around the same time of impact, but that's just my theory. Sorry about that! I just get carried away about this topic. ^_^*
Well by logic i would say Kuiper belt object because some objects seems to be bigger than pluto and were not recognize as planet.
But honnestly i would have prefer to see appear a new classification for planets, you know like the famous class M planet from Startrek
I don't like the new definition of 'planet' involving the orbit etc., what about planets that "got lost", I bet there are a lot of rogue planets (or should I say "very very big asteroids"?) near the galactical center
however it will never be definitively stated as not being so as way to many people care about it being a planet for some reason (damn you...a certain disney dog =]) when really sentimental feelings should have no influence or validity when coming up with a definition as to whether it is or not.
Just out of curiosity, are those who are insisting that Pluto is a planet doing so simply because that is what you have been taught your entire life, or have you earned a PhD in astronomy, astrophysics, astrogeology, etc., and spent the past decade debating this very question with others of the same expertise?
If you are of the former, please step aside and let the people who have dedicated there lives to this science have the final say in it. Pluto is NOT a planet. It shares nothing in common with the true planets, and is exactly the same as the other Kuiper Belt Objects. In other words, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, chances are, it's a duck; not a goose as many of you proclaim it is.
Some interesting reasons as to why Pluto is NOT a planet are:
1) It is TINY. Pluto is smaller than many moons in our solar system, including Earth's moon, Luna. Pluto and Charon are SO small in fact, that BOTH of them would rest comfortably inside the boarders of the Continental United States! Even small, light-footed Mercury is enormous by comparison.
2) Pluto does not follow a planet-like orbit. In fact, its orbit actually resembles that of a comet! It is highly elliptical and is WAY off the planetary orbital plane as can be seen here: <[link] In addition, there is an arc of Plutoís orbit that actually brings it closer to the sun than Neptuneónot very planetlike at all.
3) Other objects have been discovered in the Kuiper Belt that are bigger than Pluto, have planetlike orbits, and yet, have not been designated as planets because they donít fit the bill. Just what makes Pluto so special?! NOTHING! That is why it is no longer considered a planet! It is an Ice Dwarf, just like the rest of them.
Demoting objects from planet stature is nothing new. In the 1800ís a new planet was discovered orbiting the sun between Mars and Jupiter. Not long after, they discovered another, and another . . . and another, and before they knew it, there were dozens upon dozens of planets in the solar system with more popping up regularly. So why are there only EIGHT planets today? Because those 19th Century astronomers reclassified all of those extra planets as ASTERIODS and the area between Jupiter and Mars where they were most concentrated became known as the ASTERIOD BELT.
So take a lesson from history and from science; Pluto is not a planet. It is an Ice Dwarf.
It's completely out of whack. Totally different from the outer planets and its orbit clearly puts it as a kuiper belt object, now that other bodies that are similar in size have been discovered in the kuiper belt object, we know that this was not a once in a universe occurance and that pluto should be given another classification along with the other objects. This makes sense!
Too bad for pluto's feelings though.
u know, its not a planet because it did not originate in this solar system. Pluto was caugh by our system in the early years of the creation of the solar system. so no it's not a planet. furthermore, if it where a planet, then the other newly discovered "planets" would also be intergrated into the solar system.
It wasn't caught, it was present during the formation of the solar system, and even if it was caught, if it had a nearly circular orbit in the plane of the ecliptic and was not in the kuiper belt, it probably would still be consdiered a planet.
well there too many objects that could be a planet when compared to pluto... soo its a good way to stop more and more objects beeing declared as planets through saying pluto is not a planet anymore, which is perfectly ok in a science way.
It's been a long standing condition that for a planet to be a planet, it must have "Cleared the Neighbourhood" or so to speak. By this i mean it needs to be the only object in it's orbital path.
But now that i think of it... almost every planet has failed this criteria. Venus, Earth, mars, Jupiter, Saturn, and Uranus. All of these planets have "Trojan" asteroids. Small Asteroid Fields that share the exact same orbit as the Planet, but they are several hundred thousand miles ahead and Behind the planets. So they pose no risk.
However, Pluto is not a planet. It just happened to be the first KBO that was spherical in nature to be discovered. So it got the name planet. Before the Asteroid Belt was discovered, there were thought to be over 20 planets residing between Mars and Jupiter. this theory was later revised to the Asteroid Belt.
The Kupier Belt has been a theory for decades. it was just expected to be farther out. Now scientists cant point their telescpoes at the sky without finding at lest 1 KBO per night. i expect there to be Oort Cloud Discoveries within tne next few years. (many theorize that Sedna and Xena are Oort Cloud objects)
sorry for that long winded response. i follow these kinds of things.
The thing is that those asteroids has the same orbital period as the "parent" planet so it could not possibly clear those objects. But given the chance (never going to happen) Jupiter could definately clear out all of the asteroids. However, if you put Pluto in that same position, it would've been long smashed to bits.
However, if it were to begin that process, yes, it would be destroyed. but the resulting cloud of debris would recondense and form a new planet. This process repeats itself many million times over. That is how a planet is made. Well, a Rocky planet at least. Thats how the Earth formed.
And Pluto has already been hit by a large object that nearly destroyed it. But instead, Charon was formed from the resulting debris field. This is exactly the same way that the Moon formed.
Nuke it with an atomic bomb so we won't have anything to talk about.
In light of the long debated argument whether to consider calling pluto a planet or a Kuiper belt object
the US government as launched a top secret mission to plant a hydrogen bomb in the center of the
poor planet.. err uh kuiper object (argggg) and blow it to smitherines.
I'm just joking. I don't really care. I like it as a planet.