Comments on: New objects found: bigger than Pluto? http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2005/07/29/new-object-found-bigger-than-pluto/ I am an astronomer, writer, and skeptic. I likes reality the way it is, and I aims to keep it that way. My real name is Phil Plait, and I run the Bad Astronomy blog. Sun, 05 Jul 2009 21:06:32 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1 By: Denise Siegel http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2005/07/29/new-object-found-bigger-than-pluto/#comment-5651 Denise Siegel Tue, 29 Aug 2006 06:34:07 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2005/07/29/new-object-found-bigger-than-pluto/#comment-5651 When the hell is someone going to give 2003 UB a name for heaven's sake. I mean now that it's a "real" planet it needs a mythical "real" name. Tell your friends to get on it!!!! When the hell is someone going to give 2003 UB a name for heaven’s sake. I mean now that it’s a “real” planet it needs a mythical “real” name. Tell your friends to get on it!!!!

]]> By: Doug McElroy http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2005/07/29/new-object-found-bigger-than-pluto/#comment-5650 Doug McElroy Mon, 15 Aug 2005 15:49:16 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2005/07/29/new-object-found-bigger-than-pluto/#comment-5650 BTW, I haven't seen this mentioned here, but one reason EB313 was hard to find was that its orbit is VERY highly inclined, like 44 degrees. Nobody looks that far off the ecliptic. I don't know how Mike Brown found it. And last I heard the IAU has not passed judgement on the submitted name for it. Mike's being coy about it. He and his team have been calling it "Xena" as a working name (because "2003EB313" is too long), but they won't talk about the official name until it becomes official. BTW, I haven’t seen this mentioned here, but one reason EB313 was hard
to find was that its orbit is VERY highly inclined, like 44 degrees. Nobody
looks that far off the ecliptic. I don’t know how Mike Brown found it. And
last I heard the IAU has not passed judgement on the submitted name for
it. Mike’s being coy about it. He and his team have been calling it
“Xena” as a working name (because “2003EB313″ is too long), but they
won’t talk about the official name until it becomes official.

]]> By: How Now, Brownpau? http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2005/07/29/new-object-found-bigger-than-pluto/#comment-5649 How Now, Brownpau? Fri, 05 Aug 2005 04:43:14 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2005/07/29/new-object-found-bigger-than-pluto/#comment-5649 <strong>Tenth Planet?</strong> The discovery of 2003 UB313, an object larger than Pluto orbiting at a far greater distance, has called back into question the debate as to... Tenth Planet?

The discovery of 2003 UB313, an object larger than Pluto orbiting at a far greater distance, has called back into question the debate as to…

]]> By: MichaelHughHervey http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2005/07/29/new-object-found-bigger-than-pluto/#comment-5648 MichaelHughHervey Wed, 03 Aug 2005 18:45:06 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2005/07/29/new-object-found-bigger-than-pluto/#comment-5648 Maybe they should name it Hera. Cold, distant, and harsh. :) Maybe they should name it Hera. Cold, distant, and harsh. :)

]]> By: PaulG http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2005/07/29/new-object-found-bigger-than-pluto/#comment-5634 PaulG Mon, 01 Aug 2005 16:57:10 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2005/07/29/new-object-found-bigger-than-pluto/#comment-5634 To follow up on Suressh's question, the name is related to when it was discovered, so the "2003 U" part of 2003 UB313 means it was discoverd in the first half of November of 2003. First half of Jan would be "2003 A", second half is "2003 B" etc. The B313 part of the name is a sequence number. My question is how the heck do you get up to B313 in just two weeks? That's well over 8000 objects? Are a lot of them dust on the lens? Thanks To follow up on Suressh’s question, the name is related to when it was discovered, so the “2003 U” part of 2003 UB313 means it was discoverd in the first half of November of 2003. First half of Jan would be “2003 A”, second half is “2003 B” etc. The B313 part of the name is a sequence number.

My question is how the heck do you get up to B313 in just two weeks? That’s well over 8000 objects? Are a lot of them dust on the lens?

Thanks

]]> By: Randall http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2005/07/29/new-object-found-bigger-than-pluto/#comment-5636 Randall Mon, 01 Aug 2005 07:11:00 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2005/07/29/new-object-found-bigger-than-pluto/#comment-5636 IIRC, the names for new astronomical objects are suggested by the discoverer and approved by the International Astronomical Union Group Thingie (well, whatever it's called). So no, these things won't have crappy alphanumeric designations forever. IIRC, the names for new astronomical objects are suggested by the discoverer and approved by the International Astronomical Union Group Thingie (well, whatever it’s called). So no, these things won’t have crappy alphanumeric designations forever.

]]> By: PaulG http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2005/07/29/new-object-found-bigger-than-pluto/#comment-5639 PaulG Mon, 01 Aug 2005 04:17:49 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2005/07/29/new-object-found-bigger-than-pluto/#comment-5639 I can't be alone in hoping somebody names one of these planets "Yuggoth". If that is against the rules, then how about "Definitely Not Yuggoth"? I can’t be alone in hoping somebody names one of these planets “Yuggoth”. If that is against the rules, then how about “Definitely Not Yuggoth”?

]]>