Posted Aug 27, 2006 by FordsTowel
As most hootooers are aware, a recent redefinition of 'planet', as pertains our solar system, has removed Pluto and Sedna from its ranks. They now reside in a set of object referred to as dwarf planets, but do not meet the 'requirements' to make planet.
An update by the author or editor is probably in order, as a result.
That is all. 
|
 
|  | |
|
|
Posted Sep 8, 2009 by  Gnomon [See A60420098 for details of new sign-in system]
Three years and one update later, this issue still needs to be addressed. The Entry still talks about there being debate about what we should call Sedna. Wasn't it decided in 2006?
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Sep 11, 2009 by Shagbark
The sentence stating that there was concern about it not being Greco-Roman looks dated. There could still be a footnote saying that there was uncertainty about the naming as this is a historical fact.
and yes this name is permanent as far as I can tell, the matter is settled.
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Sep 11, 2009 by Shagbark
Also the navigation bar and tour section need to be updated.
Perhaps to match A55393608
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Sep 11, 2009 by Gnomon [See A60420098 for details of new sign-in system]
The navigation bar is easily done. I can just copy it from Eris, if you think that one is suitable.
But the whole tone of this entry about the debate about what's a planet and what's a dwarf planet needs to be tidied, since (a) that's past history now and (b) it's covered in detail in Eris.
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Sep 11, 2009 by Shagbark
I agree it should be tidied. Just not omitted entirely.
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Sep 11, 2009 by Shagbark
I note the article says:
The classification of 'planet' is still under debate, though its discoverers still maintain it to be a 'planetoid'. The main question is that if Sedna is called a dwarf planet, then should other bodies, such as Quaoar also be considered thus? Indeed, what classifications are necessary to scientifically define an object as a 'planet'?
Actually Sedna is neither a planet nor a dwarf planet,.
I may still be a candidate for dwarf planet status but that has not been finalized. As for the term planetoid that has basically been superceded by plutoid.
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Sep 11, 2009 by Shagbark
However Sedna is to far out to fit that label either.
Here is a link to types of Trans-Neptunian Objects
http://www.planetary.org/explore/to.../trans_neptunian_objects/facts.html
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Sep 13, 2009 by Shagbark
For the record I give permission for anyone who want to copy the Navigation Bar which I did for the article on Eris.
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Sep 13, 2009 by Gnomon [See A60420098 for details of new sign-in system]
Thanks, shagbark. I don't actually need your permission for something like that, but it's appreciated anyway. I'll copy it once Eris is published.
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Sep 30, 2009 by Shagbark
Another Planetary Society Link
http://www.planetary.org/explore/to.../trans_neptunian_objects/sedna.html
I presume we are waiting for Eris to hit the front page before doing any tidying up here.
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Sep 30, 2009 by Gnomon [See A60420098 for details of new sign-in system]
Yes. I can't make any further changes to the Eris entry until it is published on the front page.
I can change any of the existing Edited entries, but I'm not supposed to put links in them to Eris until it is published.
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
Key |  |  |
A: An older reply to the parent Posting
B: The parent Posting, to which this is a reply
C: A newer reply to the parent posting
D: The first reply to this Posting
| | |
Click on this icon to make a complaint about a specific Posting | |
Home
Reply
