Re: OT: Pluto IS TOO a planet!

ted@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Ted Nolan wrote:

In article <6bSdnZIHCL6eg3PZnZ2dnUVZ_oadnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Peter B. Steiger <see.sig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 20:27:05 +0000, Rob Wynne sez:
people are going to continue insisting that the millennium
started in 2000 and Pluto is a planet.

Then there are those of us who disagree on the former and agree on
the latter.

--
Peter B. Steiger

I've heard that the new definition excludes Neptune except for a
footnote saying, essentially, "Neptune is a planet". It seems kind
of embarassing.

Not really. The "clearing its orbit" business only seems like a problem
for Neptune if you view the orbits in 2-D. In reality, Neptune and
Pluto's orbits aren't close at all. What Pluto hasn't cleared is other
Kuiper objects in its orbital area.



Brian (thinks it's still pretty vague)

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)
.

Relevant Pages