Pluto-Bound Probe Ready For Long Journey

Good lord, I thought that Pluto/KBE was cancelled years ago!

On semi-related news, it's being reported that the Beagle 2 "lander" has been imaged on Mars:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4542174.stm

Can't say I'm convinced by the images myself, but it sounds like the Reconnaissance Orbiter will have it's work cut out trying to image the various debris piles resulting from the planetary science brigade's more embarassing episodes (Beagle 2, Mars Climate Orbiter, etc., ...).
 
If it's spherical, it's a planet (unless it's an orange). If it's irregularly shaped, it's an asteroid (or a potato).

Pluto is AFAIK spherical. End of debate. :p
 
A problem of recognizing Pluto as a planet would be what to do with similar objects farther out. In particular, there is an object named something like "2003 UB313" that is giving astronomers headaches; its orbit is about 1.5x farther out than that of Pluto, but it is round and considerably bigger and heavier than Pluto. There are also about a dozen known other objects out there around the same distance that are somwhat smaller but still believed to be round as well.
 
arjen, do you have any more info on those planetoids? I'd be interested in reading about them. :)
 
arjan de lumens said:
A problem of recognizing Pluto as a planet would be what to do with similar objects farther out.
Click to expand...
Why would that be a problem?

If they orbit our sun - no matter what the distance - and they're round (and at least decently large I suppose), what's the problem with recognizing them as planets, though perhaps only small ones?

Where's the stone tablets that say the solar system must only have nine planets, or no planets outside the orbit of pluto? Once we only knew of three, or even two actually, since people didn't count the earth itself; venus and mars. As technology progresses, it's natural we discover more planets that are further out, just as we've continued to discover more and more moons for jupiter and saturn for example.
 
What's the definition of "decently large" or planet? need some sort of a line to separate from an asteroid or planetoid. I am assuming by 'round' you guys mean that the body has a large enough mass/gravitation field to coalesce or accrete. How about it's orbit - If it is round and has an orbit that matches the solar plane? Going to lose one planet there. Does that make me a solar-ist cause I descriminate against a large body of matter which may be inter stellar in origin :LOL: The 9 planets come from history and needs a retrofit for sure. It might move astronomy away from astrolgy too.
 
Wasn't there a new planet found that they named "Xena" that is larger than Pluto but further out in the Kuiper belt?

In either case, at least there isn't a Uranus-bound probe! That's a looooong journey indeed!
 
Karma Police said:
Wasn't there a new planet found that they named "Xena" that is larger than Pluto but further out in the Kuiper belt?
Click to expand...
That would be the same object as "2003 UB313" mentioned above; "Xena" is one of several suggested names for the object, but no official decision has been taken yet on what its final name or classification (planet/non-planet) should be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top