For seventy-six years school children remembered the order of the nine planets with the following mnemonic: "My Very Educated Mother Just Served Us Nine Pizzas." (My-Mercury, Very-Venus, Educated-Earth, Mother-Mars, Just-Jupiter, Serve-Saturn, Us-Uranus, Nine-Neptune, Pizza-Pluto)
So... are we ditching pizza and switching to nuts? "My Very Educated Mother Just Served Us Nuts!"
Now school children everywhere need to relearn the eight planets (and forget the nine planets.) What do YOU think? Is this fair? Should we pity poor Pluto? Should Pluto retain its status as a planet?
In addition to voting, you can post a comment (below the poll) if you want to explain your position.
but it physically does not qualify to be one.
for one, the are much larger objects in our solar system. if pluto is a planet, then that should give them the right to be one too.
also, according to the IAU (international astronomical union) along with other rules "A planet is any object in orbit around the Sun that is dominant in its immediate neighbourhood."
and Pluto is only 0.07 times the mass of the other objects in its orbit. The Earth, in comparison, has 1.7 million times the mass of the other objects in its orbit.
so yeah. this is why pluto is not a planet, no matter what you want.
xXxTat-Na (17 yrs old)xXx
hayley_soccer_babe@hotmail.com
http://www.myspace.com/iwuvsoccer88
add them
ly
XxX
fix earth then space XP
pluto rocks n keep as planet!
<3Nightmare Before Chirstmas<3
it will cost lots of money and trees to re-make all the school books and information about pluto, just so that we can switch the planetes to 8 and kick pluto out!
Also......ITS NOT FAIR.........its like me giving you a presant and then 50 years later takeing it away!
]]>In the traditional model of solar systems, a celestial body larger than an asteroid or comet, illuminated by light from a star, such as the sun, around which it revolves.
Also
A celestial body that orbits the sun, has sufficient mass to assume nearly a round shape, clears out dust and debris from the neighborhood around its orbit, and is not a satellite of another planet.
First off, Pluto does orbit the sun, like any other planet. Pluto has sufficient mass to assume a nearly round shape, like any other planet. Pluto is NOT the satillite of another planet, and is larger than an astroid or comet.
The only criteria Pluto does not meet is that it hasnt cleared out the debris in its orbital neighborhood. Neptune hasnt cleared out the debris and dust in its orbit and Mars and Jupiter have not either. The astroid belt which is located between both of their orbits has not been cleared away.
So if Pluto isnt a planet any more than neither should Jupiter, Mars, and Neptune.
]]>In the traditional model of solar systems, a celestial body larger than an asteroid or comet, illuminated by light from a star, such as the sun, around which it revolves.
Also
A celestial body that orbits the sun, has sufficient mass to assume nearly a round shape, clears out dust and debris from the neighborhood around its orbit, and is not a satellite of another planet.
First off, Pluto does orbit the sun, like any other planet. Pluto has sufficient mass to assume a nearly round shape, like any other planet. Pluto is NOT the satillite of another planet, and is larger than an astroid or comet.
The only criteria Pluto does not meet is that it hasnt cleared out the debris in its orbital neighborhood. Neptune hasnt cleared out the debris and dust in its orbit and Mars and Jupiter have not either. The astroid belt which is located between both of their orbits has not been cleared away.
So if Pluto isnt a planet any more than neither should Jupiter, Mars, and Neptune.
]]>safex
]]>This is not about nostaglia or removing a rightful planet in our solar system. It is about science coming up with theories that occasionally have to be modified based on further examination.
The way some poster are responding you would think that Pluto has a right to be a planet because that is what we grew up with. Resistance to change in this case is not a crucial factor, but what about new technologies that offer new hope for cures or solutions for public health issues.
For instance, the government has just approved the spraying of foods with viruses that consume the listeria bacteria (which can be fatal if ingested). The idea of eating food purposely treated with viruses is probably enough to shock many people but the technology has been tested over many years and has proven itself harmless to humans. These particular viruses are present in our everyday lives and eat only the listeria bacteria. Should our preconceived notions of viruses (bad) affect our decision to treat food so that people do not get sick or worse.
We have treated meat, for example, with antibiotics for years and now we have strains of bacteria that are resistant to those antibiotics. The viruses don't treat the bacteria, they engulf and "eat" them. You can't become immune to being eaten if you are a bacteria. But people are all up in arms over this new technology because a "virus' is being used.
My Very Educated Mother Just Served Us Newtons!
]]>I hope that man continues to think scientifically outside the box- therein lies the cure for cancer...
]]>I prefer 8 planets to an open-ended number of round balls that we would call planets under the original proposed definition. (http://ranthonysteele.blogspot.com/2006/08/so-how-many-planets-are-there-anyway.html)
The same majority usage that assigns definitions to words like 'table' will dominate the literary landscape, no matter what those of higher learning would prefer in the end. Here's hoping that some future child peering out a porthole in his parents' family owned business/home will learn the correct usage of the word from a more knowledgeable parent.
"Hey, dad! Is that the planet Ceres?"
"Sorry son, Ceres isn't really a planet. That's why we have to dodge all these other rocks out here..."
]]>Sharon Minor
]]>Marlene Groennert
]]>