The Tenth Planet, which one?

The recent announcement that a tenth planet has been found sounded similar
to an anouncement of another tenth planet found about a year ago called
sedena (or something
like that), which one is the official tenth planet? did it get relegated to
an object that isnt quite
substantial enough to be a planet?. what are the criteria that have to be
met for an object to be given
planet status? over a certain size?, and reasonably round?.

thanks in advance for answers

Interesting what the astrologers are now saying about this discovery.
In the paper today one said that his predictions will now change??.
Why? did this planet only materialise when it was discovered?. ;-).
Steve

"Steve" wrote in message
oups.com...
Interesting what the astrologers are now saying about this discovery.
In the paper today one said that his predictions will now change??.
Why? did this planet only materialise when it was discovered?. ;-).
Steve


No, they'll change because there's another object to plot. This object will
allow the astrologer to make alot more pretty patterns and therefore add a
whole load more junk to their "predictions".

Regards

Colin Dawson
www.cjdawson.com

"Steve" wrote in message
oups.com...
Interesting what the astrologers are now saying about this discovery.
In the paper today one said that his predictions will now change??.
Why? did this planet only materialise when it was discovered?. ;-).

of course not, but his predictions were based on 9 planets, now on 10, so, to remain
believable, his predictions MUST change. If not, this planet would play no role in predicting
the future and then one could argue that no planet plays a role in predicting the future. Of
course that's unacceptable to an astrologer, so he had no other thing to say than that his
predictions will change.

Of course the interesting follow up question to ask astrologers is: what does this mean for the
predictions you made earlier? They all MUST be wrong! Was that question asked in that
newspaper?
--
md
10" LX200GPS-SMT
ETX105
www.xs4all.nl/~martlian

well astrology is too laughable for intelligent comment here, but it does
give us a laugh


"md" not given to avoid spam wrote in message
...

"Steve" wrote in message
oups.com...
Interesting what the astrologers are now saying about this discovery.
In the paper today one said that his predictions will now change??.
Why? did this planet only materialise when it was discovered?. ;-).

of course not, but his predictions were based on 9 planets, now on 10, so,
to remain
believable, his predictions MUST change. If not, this planet would play no
role in predicting
the future and then one could argue that no planet plays a role in
predicting the future. Of
course that's unacceptable to an astrologer, so he had no other thing to
say than that his
predictions will change.

Of course the interesting follow up question to ask astrologers is: what
does this mean for the
predictions you made earlier? They all MUST be wrong! Was that question
asked in that
newspaper?
--
md
10" LX200GPS-SMT
ETX105
www.xs4all.nl/~martlian

"Hayley" wrote in message
...
"md" not given to avoid spam wrote in message
...

"Steve" wrote in message
oups.com...
Interesting what the astrologers are now saying about this discovery.
In the paper today one said that his predictions will now change??.
Why? did this planet only materialise when it was discovered?. ;-).

of course not, but his predictions were based on 9 planets, now on 10, so,
to remain
believable, his predictions MUST change. If not, this planet would play no
role in predicting
the future and then one could argue that no planet plays a role in
predicting the future. Of
course that's unacceptable to an astrologer, so he had no other thing to
say than that his
predictions will change.

Of course the interesting follow up question to ask astrologers is: what
does this mean for the
predictions you made earlier? They all MUST be wrong! Was that question
asked in that
newspaper?

well astrology is too laughable for intelligent comment here, but it does
give us a laugh

indeed, astrology is rediculous. Still I would like to ask an astrologer (or a believer) about
how this 10th planet. In fact, I am curious about how they define a "planet". They can protect
themselves using a very strict definition. As we, scientists, don't have one definition, we
may even adopt theirs :-)
--
md
10" LX200GPS-SMT
ETX105
www.xs4all.nl/~martlian

Within the Solar System, Sedna had been the largest discovery since Pluto
(as had Quaoar before it and Varuna before that), and also the most distant.
The "new" object, provisionally designated 2003UB313 is thought to be the
largest discovery since Neptune, or failing that since Triton (Neptune's
major moon, slightly larger than Pluto and discovered the same year as
Neptune). Broadcasters are also describing it as the most distant known
object in the Solar System, which is wrong as Sedna is still far more
distant but could be corrected by the qualification "of its size". As to
what is a planet, what is usually meant is one of the nine well-known ones.
Minor planet is a more astronomical term for what is more commonly known by
the astrological - and increasingly obsolete with increasing telescopic
power - term asteroid. Major planet usually means one of the Nine minus
Pluto but could arguably include Pluto, Ceres (largest in the belt of minor
inner planets), Varuna, Quaoar, Ixion (in another Pluto-like orbit), Sedna,
and 2003UB313. Of course "sixteenth planet" would raise even more questions
among non-astronomers.

"Hayley" wrote in message
...
The recent announcement that a tenth planet has been found sounded similar
to an announcement of another tenth planet found about a year ago called
Sedna, which one is the official tenth planet? did it get relegated to
an object that isn't quite
substantial enough to be a planet?. what are the criteria that have to be
met for an object to be given
planet status? over a certain size?, and reasonably round?.

thanks in advance for answers

Whoops, I missed out Orcus (in yet another rather Pluto-like orbit). There
are of course also a few other unnamed ones (i.e. with only provisional
designations such as 1996TO66), but I didn't think it worth boring anyone
with a long series of characters that do not form syllables!

"Charles Gilman" wrote in message
...
Minor planet is a more astronomical term for what is more commonly known
by
the astrological - and increasingly obsolete with increasing telescopic
power - term asteroid. Major planet usually means one of the Nine minus
Pluto but could arguably include Pluto, Ceres (largest in the belt of
minor
inner planets), Varuna, Quaoar, Ixion (in another Pluto-like orbit),
Sedna,
and 2003UB313. Of course "sixteenth planet" would raise even more
questions
among non-astronomers.

In message , Charles Gilman
writes

Of course "sixteenth planet" would raise even more questions
among non-astronomers.



When they get up to the twelfth planet we are going to see all sorts of
nuts appearing. Especially as we are approaching the Mayan Millennium,
or whatever it is, when the Earth is due to cross the galactic plane.
--
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.

Jonathan Silverlight
wrote
When they get up to the twelfth planet we are going to see all sorts of
nuts appearing. Especially as we are approaching the Mayan Millennium,
or whatever it is, when the Earth is due to cross the galactic plane.

I hope it's not another boring 'end of the world collision' scenario.
Something a little more Milligan-esque would be much better, such as
Earth being visited by a giant space-faring camel who sucks up half our
water before moving on, thus leaving estate agents with a glut of real
estate and a property value crash.
That'll get 'em talking.

Denis
--
DT
change nospam: n o s p a m
v a l l e ys