Is Pluto a planet
 

It has been argued that in light of recent discoveries like Sedna and Xena, Pluto is not really of a planet but a Keiper Belt object. If you look at it's size there is no justifiaction for its status as a planet, in effect it has been grandfathered in.

However according to the AU they have no intention of revoking its status.

Is this right?

It's a Trans-Neptunian object, so they say!

I studied an Open University Astronomy course, and, in the textbooks its officially a plant, so Ill go along with those of greater intelligence than I.

yeah its a planet

A Planet. Deffo.

There is a lot of debate about this in Astronomical circles, although the AU has no plans to change its status. When it was discovered in 1930

See here

well it would just confuse me if they took away its status as a planet :spin:

There is a museum in New York, where they have removed Pluto from the model of the solar system as the curator is adamant that it is not a planet and should have never been given that status. Even if the AU fudge it so Pluto is still a "planet" he will not bring back Pluto.

Sorry but there are only 8 planets.

Im confused with all this knowledge :conf:

I'll say, Planet

Im confuslified

its a planet, size isnt everything in a quantum universe.

Sorry but there are other objects in the Keiper Belt which are bigger than Pluto and have not been given planet status. Also Pluto is smaller than our moon.

It is only deemed by a planet because it was grandfathered in.

If Pluto isn't a planet, then where is the line between planet and non planet? :puzzled:

The IAU hope to come up with that in the Autumn

yes why wouldnt it be its in our solar system on all the planet poster so yes it is a planet

Ive always thought Pluto was that dog from mickey mouse. Oh well silly me

In the past they once discovered what were thought of as planets, but later they were downgraded to the status of asteroid, so there is a precedent for reclassifying objects.

so does a planet have to have a minimum mass to qualify as a planet?

That will be up to the IAU

Personally, I'd feel weird reciting the names of the planets without adding Pluto at the end. From a scientific point of view, they should revoke its status as it isn't a planet.

I'd say Keiper Belt Object. There's nothing that stands out from Pluto comapred to the other larger KPO.

lol couldnt resist this one

Let's get the definition of the word Planet before we try to answer the question for the IAU.

Planets should have some sort of atmosphere. Landmasses? not important. Oceans of whatever. Again not important.

What's the difference between a moon and a planet? Orbital path. Nothing else really.

Does it actually mean anything, seeing as scientists like to name and compartmentalise everything from objects to assumed masses.

It's too far away to be of any real concern so they could start thinking about the more important things happening in this galaxy. Naming and classifying a planet/object on the outer edge of our solar system isn't something they should be spending time and money on.

They have now started on this discussion

See here

We will either have 10 planets or 8

Smart money is on 8.

I thought that there were only 9 planets, Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto. :conf: