|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
IAU conference on planetary definition live streaming now! 12:00 UT
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
IAU conference on planetary definition live streaming now! 12:00 UT
robin_astro wrote:
http://www.astronomy2006.com/media-stream-live.php Robin Hi Robin, I missed important parts of the live streaming, but found that it is available in the conference video archives http://www.astronomy2006.com/media-stream-archive.php See "Discussion on the Definition of a Planet" Rather interesting, apparently the show of hands at the end was "very clear" in one way or another... -- Carsten A. Arnholm http://arnholm.org/ N59.776 E10.457 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
IAU conference on planetary definition live streaming now! 12:00 UT
robin_astro wrote: http://www.astronomy2006.com/media-stream-live.php Robin It is almost two years ago since I proposed the link between the motion of the surface fractured crust and the planetary deviation from a perfect sphere using a common rotational dynamics,specifically latitude dependent differential rotation in the molten/flexible interior of the Earth. Current ideas do not link plate motion with the planetary shape deviation,assigning stationary Earth/convection cells for the former and a vague mechanism for the latter based from the dead center of the Earth. A rotating celestial body that is not solid will display differential rotation bands perpendicular to the rotational axis or rather the rotating mass will rotate at different speeds straddling the Equatorial diameter and moving to the poles.The Sun's plasma is an example of this - http://www.astronomynotes.com/starsun/sun-rotation.gif Defining or not defining a planet should be the least concern,applying the rotational dynamics of the flexible/molten interior should pave the way for a more productive meshing between astronomy and geology and this should be the real issue as a facet of a bigger issue. Wondering whether Pluto should be considered a planet or not or whether the definition of a planet is suitable may be fine for these conferences and these people do believe that they are making history however,in taking account of where they are coming from and where they are going,it matters very little.The life sciences and geology now hold the interest of people and defining things will not make astronomy any more or less interesting,these people only affirm what I already know about self-important pretension. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Toward a Rational Definition of what is a Planet | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 7 | September 29th 05 03:16 AM |