We Need to Talk About Pluto and Its Moon, Charon! Something Is Not Right!
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 09. 2023
- Get 10% off 6” and 8.5” MOVA Globes with code V101 at bit.ly/v101mova.
Back in 2006 everyone's favourite icy world, Pluto, was demoted from major planet to dwarf planet. But is this classification correct? or should it be something else? After all its so-called large moon Charon, is more like a dwarf planet than a moon! So if it's not a planet and possibly not a dwarf planet either, then what is Pluto?
/ @v101space
Want to help support my channel and gain added perks?
Join the community and become a V101 member or Patron Today -
/ @v101space
/ v101science
Subscribe - / v101science
Facebook - / v101science
Instagram - / v101__science
#v101science #pluto
Get 10% off 6” and 8.5” MOVA Globes with code V101 at bit.ly/v101mova.
Sorry, but their prices aren’t realistic. And all the most interesting globes are sold out. I found even better prices and products on Amazon!😂. I know you need to find sponsors but it’s not an interesting compagnie for ordinary people who love so much your work.😢i feel disappointed.
V101Space, have you read Philip J. Metzger's 9 points as to why the IAU was wrong about downgrading Pluto? The point he made about the size of the host star relative to the orbiting object was particularly denouncing.
(08:10) - _"... how our own Moon was created in a giant impact event ..."_
Just as you do not know how the Pluto/Charon binary system formed and you do not know how any of the other binary systems formed, you also do not know how the system of the Earth and its Moon formed. Stop speaking as if you know *_facts._* You do not.
200 USD each! And some are even more expensive. Did Mova gifted you all these globes. Anyway, wayyyy to expensive.
Pluto and Charon (Pluto I) for binary dwarf planet system 2024! 🤣🤣
I think it would have also been worth mentioning that Charon never rises or sets relative to Pluto's surface. If you're on the opposite side of Pluto from Charon you would never see it. Both bodies are tidally locked to each other. Their orbit and rotational periods are identical.
I think it would have also been worth mentioning that Pluto never rises or sets relative to Charon's surface. If you're on the opposite side of Charon from Pluto you would never see it. Both bodies are tidally locked to each other. Their orbit and rotational periods are identical.
I would like to think that if you are on the right side of either Pluto or Sharon, you would always see each at every given time. Both bodies are tidally locked to each other.
I think it would have been worth mentioning that pluto never rises or set relative to charon surface. Both bodies are tidally locked to each other. Their orbit and rotational periods are identical.
Pluto eversince I was 4 years old I love it. 45 years later still my favorite planet with the biggest heart in our solar system. Knowing it's a double planetary system makes me happy. Pluto deserved it's loving partner.
It’s certainly a uniquely fascinating planet! 💫
I'd rather have Pluto and Charon as binary dwarf planets and a whole new batch of dwarf planets to explore in our solar system than debate whether or not Pluto should be #9. It makes it more special, not less.
absolutely! 👍 💯
I like your statement
This! So much this!
Dwarf planets deserve better! HAUMEA DESERVES BETTER!
Whatever gives me more TerraGenesis planets to terraform.
Bad take Pluto's a planet
Even when the reclassification happened I wondered why Charon wasn't also a dwarf planet by definition.
Right?!
It orbits a dwarf planet for one, not a star... So that's one reason...
@@HMan2828 but not like any other orbit in the solar system. Pluto is tidally locked to Charon, so they are locked to each other. Also the barycenter is located in mid space, between the two bodies.
@@mikebronicki8264 So is the barycenter for the solar system, it's always off center, unless the mass of the star is the same as the total mass orbiting it somehow. The fact that it's tidally locked doesn't change anything...
@@HMan2828 let's compare apples to apples. No other planet has it's barycenter in space. No other planet is tidally locked with its "moon".
Before the discovery of Charon, Earth and the moon were by some considered almost a double planet system.
Fun fact: Two of Jupiter's moons are bigger than Mercury, five more moons in the solar system, including our moon, are bigger than Pluto.
I recently saw a video about how Jupiter is so massive that it actually has a barycenter with the sun that is near the sun's surface, an idea I was never taught in school, and rather surprising to me. That video also said Jupiter had somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 moons, when I was a kid we were told a number near 30, like 28 I think, but it's a bit fuzzy, further muddied by the fact that I did become aware of some new moon discoveries along the way, but had I been asked, I would have said no way more than 40.
You left out Saturn's largest moon, Titan, which is ALSO larger than Mercury, AND has an atmosphere at about 160 bars, (about 1.6 times the pressure of Earth's atmosphere at sea level.
A lot more massive.
@@davidharrison3711 You are correct, it's Ganymede (of Jupiter) and Titan (of Saturn) that are bigger than Mercury.
Pluto is a dirty slaaaaag
I went on a school field trip to Pluto back in 1982. Loved it. Great atmosphere (if somewhat tenuous). It will always be a planet to me
It was the magic mushrooms you found in the field that made you think you'd gone to Pluto!
Small planets fit better in the heart.
Did Arnold ever recover from the trip?
You can't go to pluto the dwarf planet
Mean thet mushrooms do to u went trip there 😂😂
If it's common gravitational center is outside Pluto, I think to classify it as binary dwarf planets makes perfect sense.
The gravitational centre of the sun and Jupiter is outside of the sun. Does that make this a binary star system?
@@GgdivhjkjlI read some other person's dumb comment who claimed that. 😅
@@Ggdivhjkjlit’s so funny when people make false comparisons to try to fuel their delusional ass narratives. The sun is 97+ of the solar system mass it’s not a damn binary anything. So comparing random things to try to make a point,
@@Ggdivhjkjl Really? That makes no sense considering how massive the sun is but Jupter isn't a star so wouldn't make sense anyway
@@GgdivhjkjlOne's a star, one's a planet. Nah
I think its important to understand that one of the driving reasons for reclassifying Pluto was not so much its diminutive size, but that it is just one of many tens of thousands of icy objects orbiting the sun in a belt (the Kuiper Belt, pronounced KIE-per) beyond Neptune. It didn't fit neatly into the same category as the 4 terrestrial planets, and it certainly isn't a gas giant. Everyone just sort of ignored the Kuiper belt, right up until astronomers discovered Eris, which is actually larger than Pluto, in that same belt. It just didn't make any sense to include Pluto as a planet without Eris...and any other tiny round ice-balls in that belt. And then there is Ceres the asteroid which is also large enough for its mass to pull it into a round shape. If you include Pluto, why not Ceres? And suddenly the Planet Club starts ballooning, while the definition becomes progressively less useful.
I think the concept of Dwarf Planet is a good compromise. It keeps the definition of planet manageable while allowing a more cohesive grouping of stellar objects.
I don’t care what the reasons for his declassification are! Pluto belonged (still belongs..) to our star system..orbiting our Sun and there was a reason for that..I grew up with Pluto being part of our unit..our 9th planet..I know that Pluto doesn’t and the vast, infinite universe doesn’t care, and I don’t care how silly or absurd it may be to feel this way..but I feel it very unfair..Pluto is still there so I do not give a flying fck what they say..just stating my opinion. ❤️
@@OpalineAndTheBeanyour opinion is stupid.
@@OpalineAndTheBeanso you have feelings for the classification of an inanimate object ? And you even react on CZcams for that ?
You know what it makes you ?
Very very human. Just very very human. Pluto classified as a dwarf planet was only a matter of science rigor.
Feel free to think as Pluto as a planet as you like and you don’t owe anything for those filthy ceres and Eris.
This whole thing is stupid. Pluto is a dwarf planet, science and the government jumped the gun like they always do and taught you something before we had a better understanding of the universe around us.
Just because you learned something 30-40 years ago doesn’t make it true and that’s something society needs to break out of and understand. It’s the same as being taught to hate someone or something, finding out your reason for hate was a lie and continuing to hate just out of habit , it’s literally idiotic human or not.
@@kite36 its especially infuriating since science is built on advancement and change, where we constantly try to find better information than we currently have
I still count Pluto has the 9th planet. It deserves to be the 9th planet!
It *is* a planet
As do I! Nobody will tell me otherwise except for myself
I feel the same way
I agree Pluto will always be my nineth planet
That's what they taught me in school that Pluto was the ninth planet
Was a school kid when Pluto was classed as a planet. It’s still a planet to me. Wonderful place.
Me too❤
This, Millenial here. Pluto's a planet
I agree, I will never accept the Pluto slander
I haven't been there, but Robert Heinlen has...he had quite the adventure. Rather chilly, and you don't want to be caught outside with low suit power. Trust me.
Gen Xer here. Yes, Pluto is and will always be a planet to me.
I love how it never occurs to anyone that Pluto is what it is regardless of what our short lived little species calls it.
Yeah I think people overestimate what is lost by Pluto not being considered a planet. It really means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Pluto is what it is.
I know what they say doesn’t matter one iota in the endless universe but it still pisses me off! I cant help it and i really hate labels but… in this case I am very defensive of Pluto!
Wow. Ure so smert
Also, Pluto doesn’t care!!!
@@OpalineAndTheBeanperhaps examine this in therapy? 😉 joking, I feel you.
Having always been unhappy with the reclassification (though just an interested amateur), it long ago occurred to me that the reclassification did not take into account the size ratio between Pluto and Charon. This really provides the explanation to support this! Because they are so close in size, they orbit a common centre. Very cool!
Robot Chicken expressed my feelings on this issue fairly well.
On the plus side, the reclassification upgraded Ceres to dwarf planet.
Barycentre, just like here.
that just shows that you are not a scientist or scientific interested. You are a believer. For you space is religion.
But for real scientist those known "facts" change.
But don't feel bad. Many scientist are religious crazy about their ideas.
@@stemill1569 Excellent points! Can you imagine the reaction if/when Pluto gets redesignated again, this time as a binary dwarf system with Charon, due to neither object truly orbiting each other?
That picture of a 9 planet solar system makes me wonder why mercury isn't a dwarf planet. It's the slightest bit bigger than Pluto and has no moons....
It has a clear orbit because solar-winds have blown away all the dust. Being close to the sun is an advantage from that perspective. The clean orbit criterium was specially added to disqualify Pluto.
More than twice the diameter of Pluto.
Not sure why folk get so upset about how celestial objects are classified though. Without the astronomers, we’d never have known about Pluto in the first place. Or well over 99% of the solar system. And there is still a lot to find.
It satisfies the criteria required, so why wouldn't it be? Size is not one of them and neither is the number of moons (eg. Venus).
@@willempasterkamp862 "The clean orbit criterium was specially added to disqualify Pluto."
Thats what bothers me so much about the decision. Its such an arbitrary criteria that has no real meaning into what defines what a planet is or not, per a planetary geologies/scientist.
If we magically switched the orbits of Earth and Pluto would Earth just stop becoming a planet? No, it would have all the same characteristics that it had before the magical move (minus heat as it would be too far away from the Sun).
Don’t forget about Eris and Sedna. Eris is 2-3 times (30.1-94 AU) further out than Pluto but of similar size.
Sedna is just our favorite Adventurous Planet.
Pluto was fascinating. I wasn't shocked by the fact that Pluto had so much interesting things to show us. Why? Because we haven't even scratched the surface of understanding what's out there.
Pluto will always have a special place in my heart. My old man was studying at NAU when I was a child during the summer season. As he was studying hard sciences, he would meet Clyde Tombaugh regularly. One day I got to meet him and it was awesome, as I never met anyone who discovered a planet and I was and still a total science geek, it was an awesome moment. Pluto was discovered in my home state, and I met the discoverer, so Pluto will always be a planet to me.
If we called it a planet we would have to also classify the tons of other Kuiper Belt Objects it's size or bigger to be planets too. I don't get why you people can't understand that, wtf is so bad about it being what it is, a DWARF planet?
@@jeremiahsmith7924change sucks. That’s about it, I think.
@@jeremiahsmith7924 If the qualification for planet is "must clear it's orbit of other orbitng bodies", Earth ain't a planet either, it shares it's orbit with several named asteroids. This distinction was sloppily made.
@@Fixer_Su3anaClearing the neighborhood doesn't mean nothing is near it's orbit, but rather that it's cleared an overwhelming majority of mass in it. Pluto shares it's neighborhood with other objects of similar size and mass along with countless other Kuiper Belt objects that combine to more mass than Pluto
To me Pluto is still the 9th Planet but I do like the idea of Pluto & Charon being classified as Double Dwarf Planets.
Its a planet alright but not planet 9. Its at least planet 11 because of Ceres and Orcus, and that's only considering planets that orbit the Sun directly and not the 18 planet-orbiting planets that are always closer to the Sun than Pluto.
Still the 9th Planet to me & many others.@@servantofaeie1569
@@servantofaeie1569 You count our moon as a planet then?
Distant twins might cover it.
no lol@@buffgarfield3231
they changed the definition of what is a dwarf planet specifically to be able to reclassify Pluto as one, and because some in the IAU thought that otherwise we'd end up with too many planets now that we keep finding large bodies in the Kuiper Belt.
And that's a very good reason, I'd say. We can't have nine or ten planets, it's either eight or dozens, very probably hundreds.
@@isidroramos1073And why not? Instead we now have several dwarf planets. I don't see the advantage. If we want to classify planetary objects by type there are perhaps three types, not two. Terrestrial (rocky) planets, gas giants and icy objects like Pluto and to some extent Ceres. And for that matter why should unique Earth, the only known life-supporting planet in the universe, be classified together with dead objects like Mercury, Venus and Mars?
@@rais1953There's precedent. At one time, the list was already up to eleven at least - then they stopped classing asteroids as planets. Same reasoning as with Pluto: too many planets. (So Ceres started out as a planet, then became an asteroid, and is now a dwarf planet.)
@@rais1953 You people are weird af. Why are you all so butthurt over a new and more precise classification of an object in the furthest reaches of the Solar system? It's not like being called a DWARF planet makes it less important. And no, no one is going to be naming 20+ and potentially more undiscovered objects as "planets" just because a select group of weirdos want it to be that way so they feel better about themselves.
I'm sure you know there are potentially hundreds of these objects that we still haven't discovered in the Kuiper Belt yet and we really gonna now call them planets? I feel sorry for little kids in school. Like, Pluto was not the only one called a planet when it was then reclassified as a Dwarf Planet, so where is the outrage for those other now called dwarf planets then?
And about the other stuff you're going on about, we do call them other names but they're still "planets" or "dwarf planets". Like there are exoplanets that are just water with no land and they call those water planets, we have ice planets, barren planets, diamond planet etc. but they're still "planets". 🙄 Earth has life but it's still a planet my dude. You're nitpicking at this point and it's stupid af.
so does their full definition find any flaws with the argument of Pluto+Charon being a binary dwarf planet system? And if not, then what about the other four smaller moons? They orbit around the same area in space, but they don't match the other planetary criteria (such as them not being spherical).
I remember going to th planetarium and discovered pluto was no longer a planet. I thought to myself. These people have been making us memorize 9 planets. I was a lil frustrated. I cried,"You can't do pluto like that. He is the smallest one." I felt Pluto was being bullied. 😂
And nowadays we would have to remind like 13?
While some of them are probably dwarf planets.
My Very Educated Mother Just Showed Us New Planet Charon.
I love how we all get so emotionally attached, meanwhile Pluto never writes or calls!!
Time to cancel nasa
@@ZulcanPrime You need to add Eris as well and probably more besides.
Fun fact: the State of Illinois still considers Pluto a planet, at least when it appears in "the sky of Illinois", i.e. if you project borders of Illinois to space, and Pluto happens to find itself within these borders, then it is a planet!
A state does not change definitions determined by a science community.
It would have been nice and mythologically accurate to name Charon as "Kore" instead.
Kore is an epithet/alternative name of Persephone, the wife of Hades (Pluto), and perhaps the only stable and dedicated marriage in Greek myths since Zeus , Apollo, Hermes, Poseidon etc. had many lovers, while Hades remained loyal to one.
@@kittykittykittywhere- This is what's known as a pipe dream.
It wasn't that Hades remained loyal, he was rejected by all, even Persephone, whom he had to abduct and force into marriage.
But without the boat guy nobody would enter Hades
Maybe a reclassification as a dwarf planet not a satellite may give cause for a renaming.
I think Persephone or Kore would've been more appropriate, but since it was named Charon they could at least keep the correct pronunciarion, and not call It "Sharon" because the idiot astronomer wanted to please his wife...
BTW, I think the 2006 reclassification was a big mistake. Once a Planet, always a Planet, imo. And that Pluto turned out to be such a fascinating place was like a slap in the face of those astronomers.
The problem with the IAUs definitions of a planet, if we follow them, there are ZERO planets in this universe, and Jupiter and Mercury are not even dwarf planets.
The three rules:
1. Orbit the Sun (not just a star, it's specifically the Sun)
2. Be in hydrostatic equilibrium (not just be spherical, that's just usually a result of being in hydrostatic equilibrium)
3. Cleared it's orbit.
Of the bodies in our solar system only Jupiter has achieved rule 3. So no other body other than Jupiter can be called a planet. However...
Recent research suggests that the point of orbit for Jupiter and the Sun is outside the Sun's surface, therefore Jupiter is not technically orbiting the Sun, so it's not a planet. It's also not a dwarf planet as the definition of dwarf planet is it follows rules 1 and 2 which Jupiter doesn't.
Mercury is also not a dwarf planet as, although it is spherical, recent research suggests it's not actually in hydrostatic equilibrium.
The rules set by the IAU were always contentious because they were never based on science as they tried to claim. Even at the time that they were set, there were many astronomers arguing that by their definition only Jupiter was a planet. And if you use rules that ensure that the 8 planets currently called planets, remain planets, then there are 100s of planets in our solar system. What is or isn't counted as a planet is arbitrary and down to convention alone, and if it's arbitrary then there is no reason Pluto should have been downgraded.
Indeed
The whole thing is stupid. Mount Denali is about 20,000 feet high. Now, THAT is a MOUNTAIN. Meanwhile, Mount Washington (N.H.) is about 6,500 feet high; but nobody calls it a "dwarf mountain."
Jupiter hasn't cleared its orbit. There are literally thousands of trojan asteroids in its Lagrange points both ahead of and behind it in its orbit.
The IAU definition also lacks any criteria that bars stars and black holes from being planets so long as they orbited the Sun and cleared their orbit.
@@servantofaeie1569 That is very good point.
Ceres, Pallas, Juno, and Vesta have entered chat.
Pluto was demoted for the same reasons these are no longer classed as planets: more, and BIGGER plantoids were found in the same orbit.
Personally, I thought changing its status at that particular point in time was incredibly stupid timing since the US had just, or was just about to, send a probe out there to get a closer look at Pluto. After all the years in which Pluto was designated as a planet with no ill effect to the Earth's population or our planet's bodily integrity, the world wasn't going to implode if we waited a few years until the info the mission gathered came back to us.
In the cosmic tapestry, where planets dance in night,
A pair in quiet darkness, we need to talk, it's right.
Pluto and its moon, Charon, they wander through the cold,
But something seems amiss, a mystery yet untold.
Pluto, once a planet, was demoted, we recall,
A dwarf among the giants, still, it stands so small.
But Charon, its companion, in a cosmic, graceful waltz,
They share a special bond, like partners in the stars.
Yet, as we look closer, a puzzling scene unfolds,
Something's not quite usual, a tale that time withholds.
Charon, ever faithful, in Pluto's constant grip,
It's more than just a moon; it's a secret, on this trip.
The scientists, they ponder, with furrowed brows they stare,
At Pluto and at Charon, in that frigid, distant air.
Do they hide a secret, a truth they dare not share?
Or is it just the universe, playing tricks, unfair?
Perhaps it's in their colors, Charon's icy, pallid hue,
While Pluto's heart is reddened, a mystery to construe.
Could there be hidden forces, a tale of love untold,
In the dance of Pluto and Charon, in the cosmos' chilly fold?
We need to talk about them, for Pluto and Charon's sake,
Unlock the cosmic riddle, their story we must make.
In the silence of the Kuiper, where icy secrets lie,
We'll unravel the enigma, as stars light up the sky.
So, let's explore the cosmos, with telescopes and charts,
To understand the duo, their interstellar hearts.
For Pluto and its moon, Charon, they beckon us to see,
The wonders of the universe, in their celestial mystery.
What melody we should use to sing this song? )
Nice
can i make this into a song for guitar
Yes by all means have a go 😀@@azuranokurobuchiumi
Pluto will always be a planet to me.
And despite it being emotional, you will still have a consistent criteria for judging planets. Unlike the "must clear it's orbit" crowd! For me, I call it both. I call Pluto a planet, Ceres a planet, and any other dwarfs planets out there planets. But I do call them dwarfs too. Respect for the Short KIngs!
Nine is the right number of planets for the solar system. Not eight, NINE.@@Fixer_Su3ana
Its so cool that our star system has a crazy amount of stuff going for it. Four different rocky planets one of which has water and one that had water, the suns 1st ring aka asteroid belt, four unique gas giants, a binary planet(oid) system, another huge belt and weird planetoids inside it (kuiper belt)
Great clarity in your presentation. I enjoyed it very much. Kudos.😊
Ploto is a planet in our system. Very special place.
I like it. It brings back some positive notoriety to Pluto along with Charon, which has been underdiscussed outside of astrophysics. The only question I see might be Charon's shape, but to me, it's round enough.
Especially when you consider that Mars' moon Deimos looks like a piece of candy corn that got kicked around a school hallway for a week.
@@Skank_and_Gutterboy You don't even need to go to moons, Haumea is a dwarf planet and looks like an oval.
Now you just need a Mova globe of Charon and a stand that supports a dual planet system in orbit around each other.
Hey Rob! Fascinating deep dive into Pluto and Charon’s story. Funny thing, I remember taking a field trip there with Ms. Frizzle and the Magic School Bus gang back in the day. 😉 Poor Pluto, even after showing us its heart-shaped region, it still got the ‘dwarf’ label. But on the bright side, it’ll always be a planet in my school bus memories! On ‘Cosmic Calm,’ we’ve been journeying through the wonders of the cosmos, and your content always adds a fresh perspective. Keep it up, and if you ever need a ride on the Magic School Bus, let me know! 🚀🚌
I love watching videos about Pluto n it's moon charon.. ur my favorite space channel Rob..👌👌💖
Ps.. Pluto will always be a planet to me..😅
Thank you! :)
I can't help but wonder if we had the extraordinary pictures of Pluto prior to 2006 would Pluto still be a planet
No, but it still would be considered an awesome object.
It is still a planet, a bunch of moron astronomers (non-planet experts) don't dictate that. It's assinine that the media picked up their press-release and ran with it like they rule the world.
Appearance has NOTHING to do with classification. Did you even pay attention to the video?
As stated by the scientific community, the people who decided Pluto was not a planet were people who study galaxies and space as a whole, and the planetologists who focus on planets did not have a vote on it. If the planetologists got a vote chances are that they being the experts, would have made the most appropriate scientific classification. It was like biologists determining a type of ant wasn't an ant without consulting or leaving it to the entomologists to do their job and what their degrees were in it. Ego is a huge downfall of "scientists" and poor social skills.
@@Skitdora2010
NASA has already officially discounted the IAU as a governing body and I agree. I wouldn't donate a peso to them.
I remember taking that book out of the library when I was a kid. It is how I memorized the names of the planets when I was 8 in 1977! I can still rattle them off without thinking now because of that book.
Excellent. Clear, understandable and succinct.
I agree that Charon should be considered a minor planet as the centre of orbit is outside of Pluto. Did they say that the centre of orbit of the Pluto's moons are orbiting the same barley centre? If that's the case are they Pluto's moons or Pluto/Charon's moons?
Barycentre. Yes they do and they are.
It's thought that in millions of years Earth/Moon's barycentre will rise above Earth's surface and then Earth/Moon will become a double planet.
@@kurtvanderbogarde8402 good point about the earth moon centre of orbit in the future. Makes it more difficult to define what a moon is
Which is why I've long felt they ought to classify them as a Binary Planet, deemed as Planet 9a (Pluto) and 9b (Charon), same as Binary/Trinary Star systems are. The binary system still retains the name _Pluto,_ as it's the main source of mass; the moons, still moons of Planet 9, even though it's more like "Planets" 9. 😊
yes@@michaelclement1337 , as far as we are concerned the whole point of moons is that they are the other planets' own versions of The Moon Up In The Sky.
@@DUKE_of_RAMBLE theyre not planets in any meaningful way, its like calling portugal a continent
I think the categorisation is mostly irrelevant. When it was reclassified, it did not suddenly become uninteresting.
Also you can't "un planet" a planet. I made that rule and I'm sticking by it. No backsies.
@@penningtonknickernacker921The Sun was once considered a planet but is clearly not.
How fascinating! This is one reason that I absolutely love space science. Our understanding is always growing, maybe even changing. I will admit I was among those who were upset at the reclassification of Pluto, but as I've grown older I think that perhaps we shouldn't think of it as a downgrade to something lesser but a realization that it is something altogether new.
Sailor Pluto became homeless when Pluto was officially declared to be no longer a planet.
This injustice MUST be rectified forthwith.
Dwarf planets will not be forgotten, i hope NASA would launch a space probe to explore them!
A rover would be a must
@@MarkHobbesOr a lander
@@SaneGuyFr why not both?
@@Gaian-Commander Definetly yes
Yeah, when we're done sending foreign aid to nations that don't need it.
One thing is certain......Mr. Tombaugh's discovery has kept people talking for nearly a century.
Bravo to my fellow Kansan.
Your Mobile Globe is awesome. Thanks for sharing. Hope you and Rolo have an awesome weekend.
🇺🇸❤🇬🇧
We should petition the Kansas legislature to pass a law making Pluto our official state planet.
Wow! Thus was an outstanding video! I'm officially a subscriber now.
As a definition already exists and the criteria met, yes. Good work and nicely presented.
Removing the planet designation from Pluto was all about some scientists getting attention with doing something controversial.
And selling books to make them sound smarter than they actually are. Mike Brown is the biggest offender of this.
And selling a book or two.
They the International Astronomical Union changed their rules to where, when they only had 4% of the scientists from the conference there to vote, on the last day of their conference.
I think they had it in for Pluto, the planet found by an American, to change the classification of Pluto to no longer be considered a Planet.
It's also funny that they think anyone gives a fuck. It's a planet you nerds, deal with it.
The new rules were proposed by a diversity hire and they wanted to show how virtuous they were. He then spent the rest of his career narrating planetarium shows to children, misrepresenting science in the media, and performing guest appearances on sitcoms.
Who
Dwarf planet is still a planet. I still am among those who consider Pluto a normal planet.
Pluto IS A PLANET regardless of what anyone says. We lowly humans cannot take that title away. We haven’t the right.
In my mind, dwarf planets are just planets. They were only given separate classifications to simplify education. If a non-stellar object is large enough to spherise and it orbits a star, then it's a planet - not officially, but the labels don't matter, just the phenomena. Consider this: why would an object clearing its space be a criteria for planethood? It's as arbitrary as deciding that an object can only be called a planet if it has a solid surface or a magnetic field.
Space classifications are messy, anyway, like an old house with many extra rooms added over the years, which is why objects called red dwarfs are more massive than objects called gas giants.
You are correct that clearing the orbit is arbitrary. It is based on a disproven 1802 theory of gravity. Philip J. Metzger of the University of Central Flordia demonstrates why both linguistically and scientifically the IAU's classification is fallacious.
Any taxonomy of planets is going to be arbitrary. Case in point, we lump the terrestrials in with the gas giants simply because of what they orbit. The two groups really have very little in common. Unlike biological species, where we can take a stab at identifying roughly where two species diverged from common ancestors, in astronomy, there are no common ancestors. It would make more sense to apply a collection of labels to each object based on its characteristics: e.g. Earth might be labelled a star-orbiting, rocky, cool, nitrogen-and-oxygen-atmosphered spheroid, among other characteristics. Jupiter would share the star-orbiting label, but not the rocky one. But try teaching that in elementary school. :)
@@danejohannescaldwell7999 Good reply. You have convinced me.
I like your evolution analogy of common ancestors. Gas giants are very different to terrestrials but they are related just as the elephant and rock hyrax are highly distinct relatives.
The protoplanetary disc is itself is interesting from a quasi-natural selection view. At first, it was much more homogeneous, like the early Earth during the Boring Billion. Many, many small entities relatively evenly distributed.
Gradually, dominant entities emerged. These either consumed, destroyed or exiled smaller bodies. Secondary large bodies tend to orbit the largest rocks and, together, they cleared their orbits of other rocks.
No, a planet must be gravitationally dominant in its orbit around the star. Pluto isn't, it crosses the orbit of Neptune.
@@maksphoto78 I take your point but I feel it's an arbitrary requirement, as per my early post.
If Pluto had that same orbit crossing over Neptune's but it was Earth-sized, what would it be called? You wouldn't think it would be called be a dwarf planet - perhaps just another planet, but one with a funky orbit.
Amazing videos man 🌟🌍
Hey thanks. I've had my eye out for a nice globe for a while now. It's a little small, but I love the rotation.
Good video with a relevant quistion.
Awesome video, so well explained, interesting and entertaining. Thank you!
*Roman, Pluto is the Roman form, in Greek Pluto is Hades
Both are Greek names.
The only good thing about them redefining a planet like they did is that it also arguably excludes the largest planet in our solar system, Jupiter, for the same reason. The official answer is that the term "neighborhood" in the last rule is arbitrary, so we can still consider Jupiter as a planet. Basically, "we like Jupiter, so we'll make an exception, but screw Pluto." They just didn't like Pluto because it's small, and didn't want to add other small planets to the roster, so they kicked Pluto out of the cool kids club.
Pluto will always be a planet in my heart of hearts
There was no need to downrank Pluto. It's just a matter of definitions: Everything is a dwarf planet that fits the definition EXCEPT Pluto. Done.
The problem is that the criteria "clear the orbit" is based on a disproven theory of gravity from 1802. Philip J. Metzger of the University of Central Florida demonstrates why the IAU's classification is not only historically and linguistically fallacious, but also scientifically incorrect.
That's as bad and cherry-picky as the current definition.
A Dwarf Planet is still a Planet. YEA BABY PLUTO IS THE 9th and Charon is the 10th... Also I love the Binary Planet concept. It makes a lot of sense and does make a strong case of Pluto being a Definitive Dwarf Planet.
No, it would be 10/11 because Ceres is also there
@@CouchTomato87Orcus takes less time around the Sun than Pluto
It's a planet alright, but not planet 9. It's at least planet 11 because of Ceres and Orcus, and that's only counting planets that orbit the Sun directly, and not the 18 planet-orbiting planets that are always closer to the Sun than Pluto.
Excellent assessment
What confuses me is that kids learn vowels as: A,E,I,O,U *and sometimes, Y*
Kids could just learn the planets *and sometimes, Pluto*
Pluto isn't even as big as Earth's moons, but it has it's own moon... Just amazing.
They all just swirling space dust.
Earths moon is extremely unusual is many ways, the main being its sheer size in relation to Earth. Your statement could be applied to most objects with "moons" in the solar system
Not moon: moons (plural)
Bravo V101! (Rob) I appreciated this video but I wonder what’s the next video after this you’re gonna make 😃
Nice work. Really well put together arguments 👍. Definitely got merit.
Having an emotional attachment to a planet or dwarf planet is extremely weird.
Let Charon and Pluto be our solar system's first and most prominent Double Dwarf Planet system; marvelous!
Btw. I dislike the new name Arrokoth, the old "Ultima-Thule" was a much better name choice!
I agree about Ultima Thule.
Since science likes comparisons, heres one for you. A dwarf person is still a person regardless of ability, reach, or stature. So, regardless of Pluto’s size, it’s still a planet! Maybe a terrestrial plant at that!
False equivilance.
You do realise English words can have multiple meanings right?
@@Pyxis10 No, its not. The logic of the English language allows for multiple meanings.
Well done 👏
That would be cool if we could study Pluto and Charon more closely. Pluto will always be a planet to me.
Pluto is about two-thirds the diameter of Earth's Moon. So it's small...it's like a...dwarf planet :-) ....But what about Mercury? It's a little bit bigger than the Moon, but smaller than Callisto, Ganymede and Titan...
It's also more massive than Pluto or the moon being the second densest object outside earth.
You gave to draw the line somewhere. The alternative is: we don‘t have a classification, we don‘t have a handy set of memorable planets, just thousands of „objects“ in the solar system, some very large, some tiny, some orbiting other objects…
The moons you mention are orbiting a planet. Mercury orbits the Sun. Thats the difference, not its size.
Mercury is larger than Callisto.
yes, indeed....Mercury is slightly bigger with a diameter of 4,879km compared to Callisto's diameter of 4,820.6km. :-) @@robboaron
Pluto doesn’t have red snow. That is an enhanced image using infrared to show detail. Pluto is basically just whiteish/gray
That is not correct. Pluto does indeed have a reddish brown color on parts of its surface from the tholins.
I've grown up with Pluto as a Planet and i refuse to accept anything less up until my last breath.
I‘ve grown up with Ronald Reagan being president and I refuse to accept anything else.
Wow, thanks for mova globes, finally a relevant commercial.
That was really interesting.. I didn't know that the location of the barycenter was how you defined whether an orbiting body was a moon or not. I think your argument for Pluto and Charon being a double dwarf planet is extremely sound, and I have never heard this suggested by *anyone* else so far.. Kudos!
Did you know the barycenter of Jupiter's orbit is juuuust outside of the Sun?
yeah, but if they get to be planets, we'd have to include several hundred other objects as planets. That's just too hard for 3rd graders to memorize.
@@toweypatDepending on how it's calculated (and who's doing the calculating) Yes and No.
If Sol and Jupiter were the only two objects in the System, that would be correct, but because of everything else in the System, the Sol-Jupiter Barycenter moves into and out of the Photosphere because of countervailing gravitational forces at different times.
I kinda did about 30 years back as a child...
@@guysmiley4830 Pluto could just be given the status of honorary planet.
I heard that they demoted Pluto to "avoid confusion among scientists and students in schools" but that's absurd. Whilst I understand agree with the reclassification over all I think Pluto should have been grandfathered in and remained a full fledged Planet and I don't think scientists *especially*, nor students would be confused.
@@wayneallen8469 Such a weird insult that doesn't add anything to the conversation that you did.
@@wayneallen8469 He never stated anything that would suggest that he was confused, he merely opined about a vaguely attributed quote from secondhand sources. However that is common in formal english speech. It is his opinion he stated, and he stated it well enough for others to understand him. There is no basis for your accusation of confusion. Your accusation is illogical to the point of putting into question your own mental capabilities. Please make an appointment with a licensed psychotherapist.
I hope that some day we will have another mission to the outer planets like Cassini, but with ion drive to reach and establish orbit around as many as possible.
It would have been funny if every time you said Charon, you cut to Ozzy Osborne yelling for Sharon on his reality TV show. Lol.
Another excellent video. Pluto will always be a planet in my heart!
the comment section is going to make me say and regret a lot of things...
Also pluto is not a planet, it is a little wriggly half-asteroid.
How can it not be a planet? It’s almost perfectly spherical and has the supposed mass of a small planet, it has a moon like a planet, it orbits our sun like a planet, it even generates a temporary atmosphere when it unthaws on its closest orbit to the Sun, why is it not a planet? It’s a planet. If it’s not a planet, then Mercury isn’t a planet and that’s on that.
The IAU's claim is that it has to clear the orbit. Never mind that the criteria is based on a disproven 1802 theory of gravity.
If Pluto is a planet, we have 30 something planets in our solar system. Which is fine for me, but it appears that there is a wish for a handy set of memorable planets that everyone knows. And if you want that, you need to draw the line somewhere. Unfortunately for the world, the line-drawers have not considered that they are drawing the line to close to an object that has been discovered by an American astronomer, leading to (so far) 17 years of hurt ego of the greatest nation of all…
@@joachimb5721We have at least 36 and at most about 50 known. And I'm all for teaching children about each one in detail. Children can memorize a lot more than adults.
@@servantofaeie1569 I tend to be on your side here. I was only arguing why the IAU made that decision even though I am not happy with it, either. Just for different reasons than the patriotic Americans grieving over their "own" planet.
Except a dwarf planet is a type of planet. Not a type of moon, or sun, but planet. Gas giants, ice giants, etc., all types of planets. It doesn't care what you call it. A right footed shoe is still a shoe, not a glove or hat. Who's gonna effectively enforce you not calling it whatever you want to subjectively?
I don’t know if Pluto’s demotion to dwarf planet was already in the wind when New Horizons launched early in 2006, but I can imagine various NASA project members’ reaction. NASA essentially subsists on publicity, and a fly-by of a dwarf planet wasn’t going to have the same cachet, no matter how well-known Pluto was in any case.
The controversy probably helped their PR
Taking Pluto off from the list of planets are one of the biggest miscarriages of justice.
That little Pluto looks so cute!!😁😁🥰🥰 I definitely wanna get a mova globe!🤩🤩
If anyone ever finds the gold disks on Voyagers I and II; they'll have a problem finding our solar system now. Is this a good thing, or a bad thing?
@@wayneallen8469*pulsars
In addition to all the people below, who point out why reclassifying Pluto as a dwarf planet made sense, you might as well try to get the Moon and Earth classified as a double planet system.
At first I read - We need to talk about Pluto and his moon, SHARON! Like husband is talking to his wife Sharon.
Charon’s discoverer named the celestial body after his wife, so you’re not wrong.
Another thing to consider: if a third body comes along and gravitationally disrupts Charon's orbit, does the Solar System's planet count go from 8 to 9 or even 10 (if the third settles into a stable orbit)? What kind of definition is planet (answer: a poor one) that might not be valid for all time? After all, way back at the start, ALL of the bodies we call planets were still clearing their orbits of debris/material (planetisimals).
Only if Pluto's (and Charon's) orbit(s) around the Sun no longer intersect with Neptune's.
Until the debris in their orbit gets absorbed by their gravitational pull, they can't be classified as planets.
Earth still shares it's orbit with several named asteroids. Guess Earth ain't a planet!
The solar system will not exist for all time, so there you are. The sun has about 5 billion more years to go and wil lthen swallow up the earth.
If the scientists had waited until New Horizons got to Pluto, it would never have been demoted.
1. It is bigger than they thought;
2. It is rounder than they thought;
3. It has an atmosphere.
Pluto and Charon are both real planets to me. Go Pluto!
Unfortunately, the IAU wanted the planet to be demoted. So they rushed to demote it before New Horizons got there.
Either way, the IAU looks like an idiot now seeing how planetary planet Pluto is!
@@Jellyman1129 They should just swallow their pride and reverse their decision at this point.
it wasn't ''demoted'' Doc Tyson is just another semi-literate number-crunching USAn prat who tried to clarify a point of language he mis-understood himself to a semi-literate press who are the world worst language abusers. I was a kid in the SEVENTIES and my text books about space all said Pluto/Charon was a ''binary dwarf planetary system''.. Tyson's issue is he thinks ''dwarf planet'' means Not A planet.
@@CosmicCleric There have been multiple PhD planetary scientists who have gone to the IAU and told them to reconsider or reverse their decision, but the IAU has repeatedly denied and refused to do so despite the new data.
It’s clear this elitist group of pretentious pompous snobs can’t listen to reason, so we just ignore them. Besides, we don’t need an authority to tell us what’s official and what’s not. Science doesn’t work that way. The experts who study planets have all already moved on and ignore the IAU regardless of their vote. The geophysical planet definition will become the official one because it’s widely used and the IAU can catch up later. They’ve already become irrelevant in this debate, earning the nickname of the Irrelevant Astronomical Union.
Oh the IAU would have demoted it with all that information. None of that addresses how cluttered its neighborhood is. It having an atmosphere even doesn't mean it's a planet, Saturn's moon Titan has a thicker atmosphere than even Earth.
Pluto we will never forget that you are a real planet and the heart of our solar system! 🤍🩶
I don't agree with the reclassification, since Pluto should be allowed as an exception, to honor the efforts of the people who first found and studied it. I also would like to call out that only 5% of astronomers were allowed to vote to demote it, and many claims exist about the vote having been as rigged as possible as well. If the IAU isn't going to allowed a fair vote among their members, then it shouldn't be their decision to make.
Yes, the vote was very rigged. The third criterion was added specifically to exclude Pluto and the dwarf planets. The IAU is unqualified to make a decision like this.
Tysm
Well, at the very least I can say: I've never seen a dwarf planet go this hard.
Pluto will always be a planet in our hearts.
Pluto is a dwarf planet in everybody else’s hearts, including mine.
Still think downgrading Pluto has to be one of the greatest injustices of this century.
I used to hear people pronouncing “Charon” as “Caron” and not “Sharon”.
That is the classical pronounciation, something the discoverer flubbed.
Both are usable. I've only ever known it as 'Ka-ron' so it is unusual for me to hear people calling it 'Sha-ron' these days.
Amazing visuals and commentary, got to be a V101 video. Thanks for your efforts to keep me entertained Rob.
Growing up, I had a poster on my wall where three fourths of it showed the planetary orbits and the last quarter 10 long vertical rectangles showing a picture of each planet, including the sun with some quick basic facts (distance from the sun, size, how many moons, dominant elements, etc.) Obviously the pictures of the sun and planets from Mercury to Neptune were real but Pluto's was that blurry black, dark orange, and gold color image based on Hubble's observations. after digesting how extremely far Pluto is from the sun, I tried as I was going to sleep, to look at that blurry colored picture of Pluto and imagine it's details. Imagine what it really truly looked like and wondering if I would ever see a real picture of it. Pluto holds a special place in my heart.
Speaking of heart, while everyone sees the shape of a heart on Pluto's official image, I see the profile of Pluto, the Disney dog. Quite eye-opening when you realize it.
If the IAU really wants to be recognized as a legitimate astronomy institute, they need to classify solar system objects by types and characteristics. The term planet refers to wanderers so really all solar system objects qualify. But we have rocky objects, gas objects, round objects, Kuiper Belt Objects, asteroids, comets. Some may share more than one of these characteristics, but science does not normally leave something out because it is too small. Under some circumstances it seems that Earth can be considered too small but human arrogance refuses to allow that classification. IAU show us that you truly understand the various types of objects in our solar system or continue to take the lazy way out.
Yes Pluto is still going through depression after it was booted down from it's Planet status.
The vote for Pluto’s reclassification was not unanimous. It barely passed. As far as I’m concerned it’s still a planet. If earth was near Jupiter it would be captured and become a moon too. Did Earth clear it’s space around it?
Of course Pluto is still a planet. Science isn’t determined by votes or politics. And no, Earth has not removed debris from its orbit, neither has Jupiter. Either they’re ALL planets or NONE of them are planets. I’d go with the former.
That’s… not true. Like, at all.
@@billyskittles1036 Yes it is. The vote was nearly split down the middle, happened at the last minute, and was composed primarily of unqualified people. It’s illegitimate on multiple levels.
If pluto is a planet there are at least 3 other objects that need to be as well. The reality is 8 planets or at least 11
@@jamesn0va Logically, it makes sense to go with at least 11 planets. If other objects out there are planetary and have the same basic attributes as planets, they should be recognized as such.
I kinda expected a Starfield Vid, but stayed regardless, because it was so interesting :D