Planet Classification: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

Astronomy and Astrophysics – Astronomy

Scientific paper

Rate now

  [ 0.00 ] – not rated yet Voters 0   Comments 0

Details

Scientific paper

Jewitt and Lu's (1993) discovery of the Kuiper belt of icy bodies orbiting beyond Neptune forced many to reconsider Pluto's time-honored classification as a bona fide planet. The American Museum of Natural History in New York brought this shifting paradigm to the public in 2000 with a suite of new exhibits that explicitly grouped Pluto with this growing number of newly discovered Kuiper belt objects. And in 2006, the IAU voted on a definition for the word Planet that formally excludes Pluto, invoking the modified term Dwarf Planet to describe it. Here we make the case that the word Planet is, today, only marginally useful, and that the contents of the solar system is in bad need of a lexicon that reflects the extraordinary base of scientific knowledge gleaned about them over the past forty years.

No associations

LandOfFree

Say what you really think

Search LandOfFree.com for scientists and scientific papers. Rate them and share your experience with other people.

Rating

Planet Classification: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.

If you have personal experience with Planet Classification: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Planet Classification: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly will most certainly appreciate the feedback.

Rate now

     

Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-1105800

  Search
All data on this website is collected from public sources. Our data reflects the most accurate information available at the time of publication.