Discovery of Pluto Reaches 75th Anniversary

Cronus would have been considered
seriously, had it not been initially proposed by "a certain detested
egocentric astronomer".

I wonder how such a person would have gotten thru grad school
and presumably got a PhD. From what I understand about
grad school, one needs reasonably decent people skills to
get the faculty to want to grant the PhD to you. Or maybe
it was a case of "Let's give him the PhD but not a position,
he'll then leave us and we'll be rid of him". ?

In article ,
richard schumacher wrote:
...Cronus would have been considered
seriously, had it not been initially proposed by "a certain detested
egocentric astronomer".

Anyone know who that was? Lowell himself?

No, Lowell was dead. (They did ask his widow for suggestions, but she
wasn't much help.) Don't know who the leading astronomical egos of that
era were...
--
"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer
-- George Herbert |

Anyone know who that was? Lowell himself?


I don't know, but my guess would be TJJ See.




About ten years ago Sky & Telescope did an article
about the naming of Pluto. And made brief mention
about the a-hole astronomer who suggested "Cronus".
DOn't remember his name though. S&T does every so
often articles about not just the scientists and
telescope builders that "got it right", but also
those that screwed up, flamed out, or didn't work
out. A few months ago they talked about a scope
in Australia that was built for observing with the
eye, but then astrophotography was rapidly coming
up as the better way to observe. And that that telescope
was not suitable for astrophotograpy (it's drive
wobbled too much and would smear photo images).
Until it was refurbished a few years ago, but then
a wildfire destroyed it.
And then there was Fred Hoyle (IIRC) who favored the
"steady state" model of the universe, and gave the
flippant name "Big Bang" to the theory he didn't buy.
But the observational evidence went against him
(Don't you hate it when that happens! :-) ) but his
name "Big Bang" stuck.

On Sat, 5 Feb 2005 16:05:34 GMT, (Henry Spencer)
wrote:

Herschel originally named it "Georgium Sidus", i.e. George's Star, after
the then king of England. That did not go over very well elsewhere in
Europe.

....Nor did it go over well in Englandland, although they were a bit
more private about their disenchantment with the idea.

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 08:26:58 -0600, Pat Flannery
wrote:

I know about Uranus and Herschel;

....Hey, let's leave Henry's personal life out of this, Pat.

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 20:08:15 GMT, robert casey
wrote:

I wonder how such a person would have gotten thru grad school
and presumably got a PhD. From what I understand about
grad school, one needs reasonably decent people skills to
get the faculty to want to grant the PhD to you. Or maybe
it was a case of "Let's give him the PhD but not a position,
he'll then leave us and we'll be rid of him". ?

....It depends on the school. Some "institutions of higher learning"
tend to play the internal politics game to the hilt - which is how
deep the grad students have to take it up the rear in order to get
their Phuds. Other programs tend to ignore personal factors and base
their judgements on how well the applicant passed his required courses
and on the one thing that really does matter - the dissertation.

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

In article et,
robert casey wrote:
Cronus would have been considered
seriously, had it not been initially proposed by "a certain detested
egocentric astronomer".

I wonder how such a person would have gotten thru grad school
and presumably got a PhD. From what I understand about
grad school, one needs reasonably decent people skills to
get the faculty to want to grant the PhD to you...

Office politics and having a supervisor with clout can counteract that to
some extent. Also, there's no shortage of people who are first-class
*******s by nature, but can grit their teeth and do a reasonable imitation
of a civilized person when given overwhelming incentive.

Finally, bear in mind that in 1930, one could still be a first-rate
scientist or scholar without a PhD, given sufficient ability and a bit of
luck. It wasn't as easy as it had been a few decades earlier, but it also
wasn't as impossible as it became a few decades later. (A non-science
example: JRR Tolkien was a renowned scholar and an Oxford professor with
only a Master's degree.)
--
"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer
-- George Herbert |

In article t,
robert casey wrote:
Herschel originally named it "Georgium Sidus", i.e. George's Star, after
the then king of England. That did not go over very well elsewhere in
Europe.

I see that kissing the boss's ass is a time honored
tradition in human history... :-)

Worked, too -- Herschel went from being a musician/composer with an
interest in astronomy, to being the King's Astronomer with a £200/yr
salary (rather a lot of money in those days) and a hobby of playing
and composing music.

But why "Uranus"?

The mythological father of Saturn -- in the same way that Saturn was the
father of Jupiter -- and one of the originators of astronomy.
--
"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer
-- George Herbert |

robert casey wrote...

About ten years ago Sky & Telescope did an article
snip
A few months ago they talked about a scope
in Australia that was built for observing with the
eye, but then astrophotography was rapidly coming
up as the better way to observe. And that that telescope
was not suitable for astrophotograpy (it's drive
wobbled too much and would smear photo images).
Until it was refurbished a few years ago, but then
a wildfire destroyed it.

Thats the Mount Stromlo complex at Canberra.
Reconstruction is moving along, pic gallery etc at:
http://www.mso.anu.edu.au/gallery/reconstruction

"The Advanced Instrumentation and Technology Centre (AITC), which will
replace the workshops destroyed in the fires of January 2003. It will offer
expanded design, manufacturing and testing capabilities for precision
optical instruments, opportunities for higher degree student participation
in technical projects, and a research and development program focusing on
Extremely Large Telescopes. Construction began in September 2003."

- Peter

Cronus would have been considered
seriously, had it not been initially proposed by "a certain detested
egocentric astronomer".

Anyone know who that was? Lowell himself?

Oh, no. According to Clyde Tombaugh's autobiography (an EXCELLENT book,
BTW, and I still think the entire story would make a terrific episode of
"Nova"), the Lowell Observatory staff had only fond memories of Percival
Lowell (who was by that time long dead). Tombaugh did not mention the name
of this astronomer in question but, unfortunately, it seems the list of
potential candidates was kind of long. At that time the Lowell Observatory
was often regarded as the "bad boy" of astronomy.

Tombaugh was only a junior astronomer (with only a high school education) at
the time of Pluto's discovery, and the senior astronomers on the staff
taught him a great deal not only about astronomy, but the world in general.
They warned him that every screwball and con artist would soon descend upon
him as soon as word of the planet's discovery got out, and "how right they
were."

Tombaugh wrote that because Pluto moves so slowly, they didn't have many
pictures available of the planet's motion to plot a very accurate orbit.
When telegrams from other astronomers arrived, Tombaugh's boss showed him
one from California. "I remember how irritated Dr. Slipher was at this,"
Tombaugh wrote. It contained not a word of congratulations, only a request
for orbit and position data. "All 'x' is interested in is what he can get
out of it," said Dr. Slipher, so he ignored the request. Some days later,
another telegram arrived from the California astronomer, this time "profuse
with congratulations."

Tombaugh didn't come right out and say so, but I think the Lowell
Observatory staff would have regarded any naming ideas from Lowell's widow
with more than a little bit of reluctance. She tried to break her husband's
will, which bequeathed a lot of money for the observatory, and the
litigation dragged on for years. By the time the observatory finally won
the case, they'd lost a lot of money in the process.