Defending Pluto: The Planet That Refuses to be Forgotten
Written on
Chapter 1: The Heart of the Matter
Pluto's status as a planet was altered in 2006, but does it truly deserve to be labeled as a dwarf planet?
As a child, like many others, I was captivated by the solar system, but I developed a particular fondness for one celestial body: Pluto. The thought of this distant little world being reclassified left me disheartened. Despite my bias, I stand firm in my belief that Pluto should still be regarded as a planet.
International Astronomical Union's Role
In 2006, the International Astronomical Union (IAU) held a pivotal meeting in Prague, Czech Republic, to address a contentious issue: the classification of Pluto. The IAU, responsible for naming celestial bodies, faced the task of deciding whether Pluto could retain its planetary designation. Although the IAU boasts over 9,000 members, only 424 were invited to contribute to this significant discussion and vote on Pluto's fate. The members primarily focus on astronomical studies rather than planetary science, leaving out the experts who specialize in planetary characteristics.
The Definition of a Planet
Historically, the criteria for defining a planet have been ambiguous. The IAU felt it necessary to establish a definition before making a judgment on Pluto. According to their criteria, a body must fulfill three conditions: it must orbit the sun, be spherical in shape, and clear its orbital path of debris like asteroids and comets. While the IAU acknowledged that Pluto meets the first two criteria, they concluded that it failed to clear its orbital path effectively, particularly due to the size of its moon, which is nearly half the size of Pluto itself.
After an extensive discussion lasting eight days, the IAU concluded with a vote that demoted Pluto to the status of a dwarf planet, with fewer than 5% of IAU members participating in the historic decision.
Section 1.1: The Opposition to the IAU's Decision
Planetary scientists, who were notably absent from the discussions, strongly contest the IAU's verdict. Many, including NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine, advocate for Pluto's classification as a planet. Numerous planetary scientists have rallied to challenge the IAU's definition, arguing that it is flawed.
One of the key points of contention is that Earth, Mars, and Jupiter also have not entirely cleared their orbits of debris. Each of these planets hosts numerous asteroids and experiences meteor impacts. Thus, by the IAU’s own standards, they too would not qualify as planets.
Subsection 1.1.1: A Critique of Planetary Classification
Philip Metzger, a planetary scientist at the Florida Space Institute, criticizes the IAU's criteria as poorly defined, arguing that no planet has ever completely cleared its orbit. His review of two centuries of scientific literature revealed only one outdated paper from 1802 that suggested such a requirement, which has since been disproven.
Metzger emphasizes Pluto's geological complexity, arguing it exhibits more geological activity than Mars, with only Earth showing greater dynamism. He maintains that Pluto’s demotion lacks scientific validity.
Alan Stern, principal investigator of NASA's New Horizons Mission, which explored Pluto in 2015, supports this view. He asserts that Pluto exhibits characteristics typical of planets, including an atmosphere, an internal ocean, and mountain ranges.
Section 1.2: Welcoming New Discoveries
Astronomer Will Grundy from the Lowell Observatory suggests that the IAU's reluctance to classify Pluto as a planet stems from the discovery of numerous small planets akin to Pluto. He believes the IAU fears that the proliferation of new planets dilutes the uniqueness of the known planets. Nonetheless, he advocates for embracing these scientific advancements.
Jessie Christiansen, an astrophysicist at CalTech, echoes this sentiment, suggesting that the existence of more planets should not diminish Pluto's status. She argues that just because we discover more stars doesn't mean we stop calling them stars.
Ultimately, many planetary scientists have chosen to disregard the IAU's classification of Pluto, treating it as a legitimate planet in their research and advocacy.
Chapter 2: Final Thoughts
Although the IAU remains steadfast in its decision to demote Pluto, I appreciate the ongoing efforts of planetary scientists to champion its rightful place among the planets. To me, Pluto will always hold the status of a planet.
Other articles from this author:
Resources:
Britt, Robert Roy. Space: Pluto Demoted: No Longer a Planet in Highly Controversial Definition. August 24, 2006. Space. 2021.
Falk, Dan. NBC News: Is Pluto a planet or a dwarf planet? NASA chief picks sides in emotional debate. August 29, 2019. NBC Universal. 2021.
Inman, Mason. National Geographic News: Pluto Not a Planet, Astronomers Rule. August 24, 2006. National Geographic Society. 1996–2008.
Wells, Robert H. University of Central Florida Today: Pluto a Planet? New Research from UCF Suggests Yes. September 6, 2018. University of Central Florida. 2021.
This video titled "Czar - In Defense of Pluto" explores the passionate arguments supporting Pluto's planetary status, featuring insights from various experts in planetary science.
The video "Why is Pluto not a planet? Planetary scientists say it is. Here's why the IAU got it wrong." delves into the debate surrounding Pluto's classification and the scientific community's ongoing support for its recognition as a planet.