Comments on: International Astronomical Union: February A ‘Dwarf Month’

By: Laurel Kornfeld

Laurel Kornfeld — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 18:13:52 +0000

The IAU deserves every bit of mockery it gets. Anyone who watches the 2006 planet definition session (the video is on the IAU’s web site) can see what a circus this session was. The definition adopted violated the IAU’s bylaws, which prohibit the introduction of a new resolution in real time before it has been vetted by the appropriate committee. It also makes no sense in saying that dwarf planets are not planets at all, which is inconistent with the use of the term “dwarf” in astronomy, where dwarf stars are still stars, and dwarf galaxies are still galaxies. And it classifies objects solely by where they are while ignoring what they are. If Earth were in Pluto’s orbit, according to the IAU definition, it would not be a planet either. Any definition that takes the same object and makes it a planet in one location and not a planet in another location is one that begs to be overturned.

By: Paper Hand

Paper Hand — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 18:40:11 +0000

I’ve never understood the big ado about Pluto. It was either demote Pluto or recognize dozens of new planets. I’d prefer 8 over dozens myself. I doubt Pluto would ever have been called a planet if it weren’t for the quirk of history that lead to it being discovered several decades before others of its kind.

By: Lilian Nattel

Lilian Nattel — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 18:36:20 +0000

That’s very funny. I vote for the 30 hour day and 10 day week, 5 for working, 5 for the weekend.

By: Chris C. Mooney

Chris C. Mooney — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 15:25:12 +0000

This kind of mockery just shows how much the IAU risked by demoting Pluto–especially as it was hardly an astronomical consensus that this ought to be done.

By: humorix

humorix — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 14:17:16 +0000

Bravo! I think that it would be necessary to vote for 20-hour day, the year has 300 days.