Pluto and the Moon are planets? New claims for classification criteria

Pluto and the Moon are planets? New claims for classification criteria

Artistic vision of Pluto and Charon, observed from another satellite

Greek astrologers looked at the sky and saw only stars and planets! Some scientists believe that the time has come to reconsider our understanding of the classification of the earth satellite and dwarf planets, such as Ceres and Pluto, which should return their rightful place in the planetary pantheon.

These ideas may seem strange, but they have a base established by centuries of scientific literature. The authors of the study studied documents for more than 200 years to answer the questions: “What makes the planet a planet? and “Does this comply with the requirements of the IAU from 2006?”.

The authors believe that the International Astronomical Union (IAU) unfairly lowered the status of Pluto. There are at least 120 examples in the scientific literature that violate the definition of MAS. Researchers believe that the criteria put forward simply will not benefit science.

How to become a planet?

After 76 years of existence in the status of the planet, Pluto was lowered to the dwarf type in 2006, when the IAC voted for the fact that the ice object could not meet the requirements:

  • the object should rotate around the sun.
  • be massive enough to create the shape of a sphere under the action of its own gravity.
  • to clear the area of ​​debris and other celestial bodies, proving gravitational dominance in its own territory.

It was the third criterion that proved fatal for Pluto. It rotates in the Kuiper Belt - a massive cluster of asteroids and planetoids extending beyond the orbit of Neptune. In its vicinity are viewed thousands of other celestial bodies and fragments, each of which has its own gravity. It turns out that Pluto does not dominate this segment, which means, according to the MAC, cannot be a planet.

But the authors of the study believe that the third requirement is too narrow and vague, and is not reflected in the context of past scientific documents. Having studied hundreds of published astronomical works since the 1800s, the researchers discovered the presence of authors' agreement on the shape of the sphere and the rotation around the Sun, but the rule with “cleaning the neighborhood” appeared only once in 1801.

They believe that the exclusion of Pluto is an unreasonable and arbitrary decision based on historical precedent; therefore, it should be ignored in the future. It is also worth remembering that in describing the satellites of Jupiter, Galileo used the term “planets”. So dwarf planets should be perceived as equal worlds.

According to the revised standard, Pluto should be considered a planet. What about the Earth's Moon, the moons of Jupiter and Saturn. More disputes already begin here, and the authors advise to appeal to the scientific literature, and not to be limited to the voting of the IAU.

Comments (0)
Search