[sac-forum] Re: What is a Planet

I was listening to NPR news this afternoon. The astrologers really like this proposal (I assume this is what was being discussed in NPR) because according to them they will have much more to work with (and thus to more easily fool the fools). They even have started making absurd connections, such as some prior planets being discovered during revolutionary times and the now current ones (because of the proposed definition) being discovered during the war against, supposed, terror. I turned the radio off before I heard the full spiel. I imagine they are going to treat these as planets irrespective of the IAU ruling.
They (the astrologers) should be thrown in the Dungeon for crimes against humanity.
Stan

Paul Dickson wrote:

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_planet: 

The IAU published its definition proposal on August 16, 2006. This
definition loosely follows the second option considered by the 19-member
panel in 2005. In its exact wording, it is:

   âA planet is a celestial body that (a) has sufficient mass for its
    self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a
    hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (b) is in orbit
    around a star, and is neither a star nor a satellite of a planet.â





Other related posts: