Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Illinois Declares Pluto a Planet

Posted by timothy on Fri Mar 06, 2009 07:44 AM
from the after-ruling-out-pebble-and-mailing-tube dept.
The Bad Astronomer writes "The legislators in Illinois, always on the lookout for more places to find voters, have passed a resolution declaring Pluto is a planet. I'm not sure what else can be said here, except that — besides overstepping their jurisdiction just a wee bit — they make a couple of scientific howlers in the resolution itself."
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) on Friday March 06 2009, @07:46AM (#27090005)

    Everybody knows Pluto is a dog.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 06 2009, @07:47AM (#27090017)

    Slashdot declares Illinois retarded

  • by mc1138 (718275) on Friday March 06 2009, @07:49AM (#27090023) Homepage
    Why no one trusts them to get things done anymore... We're in the biggest financial crisis in years and they spent the time to declare Pluto a planet. It means nothing, is non binding, and shows a huge disconnect between the political scene and the general populace.
    • by Notquitecajun (1073646) on Friday March 06 2009, @08:12AM (#27090209)
      Frankly, the more time they spend doing silly crap like this, the less time the spend screwing something important up. It's too bad it wastes tax dollars to do it, though...
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Frankly, the more time they spend doing silly crap like this, the less time the spend screwing something important up. It's too bad it wastes tax dollars to do it, though...

        Would you rather that they go after hookers on craigslist?

    • But -- they did it for the children! We wouldn't want children to become confused with Pluto being listed as a planet in their old, out-of-date text books while the general consensus in the scientific community is that Pluto is a big snowball. Declare legislatively that Pluto is a planet and -- poof -- there you go! No more confused children!
  • by roman_mir (125474) on Friday March 06 2009, @07:54AM (#27090061) Homepage

    and I declare Illinois a corn field.

  • In other news... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Dachannien (617929) on Friday March 06 2009, @08:09AM (#27090181)

    In other news, a giant robotic Neil deGrasse Tyson was seen bursting through the walls of the Illinois Capitol Building, saying, "Pluto is a Plutoid. You have 30 seconds to comply."

  • by teslar (706653) on Friday March 06 2009, @08:15AM (#27090233)
    People of Illinois,

    we have duly noted your recent reconsideration of Pluto and its classification. We appreciate this sign of good-will and will take it into account in our upcoming invasion of Earth.
    Although I can make no promises at this point, I am able to inform you that sparing your lives is currently viewed favourably amongst our population.

    Yours sincerely,
    Gral Rex,
    Minister of Earth Affairs, Government of Pluto

    p.s. to the rest of mankind: You are all still toast.
  • by rlp (11898) on Friday March 06 2009, @08:16AM (#27090239)

    Being a planet is a valuable thing. So, how much did it cost Pluto?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 06 2009, @08:27AM (#27090315)

    If Pluto isn't a planet, it will cost a bunch of money to replace all the fifty year old science texts.

    If Pluto is a planet, they can keep using the fifty year old science texts.

    What, you think I'm kidding! You obviously aren't a teacher.

  • by Stoutlimb (143245) on Friday March 06 2009, @08:42AM (#27090477)

    The law is written thusly: "that as Pluto passes overhead through Illinois night skies, that it be reestablished with full planetary status"

    Because Illinois is a northerly state... does Pluto ever actually pass "overhead"? Ever? Pluto's orbital inclination to the sun is about 11 degrees at maximum. The latitude of Illinois is much higher than that, at about 36 degrees. So Pluto may never pass through their air space, even if the borders of Illinois are extended upwards to infinity.

    But since Pluto can never truly be "overhead", does that mean the law never actually goes into effect?

    Comments? Suggestions?

    • by the_other_chewey (1119125) on Friday March 06 2009, @09:30AM (#27091027)

      Because Illinois is a northerly state... does Pluto ever actually pass "overhead"? Ever?

      Yes.

      Pluto's orbital inclination to the sun is about 11 degrees at maximum. The latitude of Illinois is much higher than that, at about 36 degrees. So Pluto may never pass through their air space, even if the borders of Illinois are extended upwards to infinity.

      You are thinking about the inclination relative to the sun's equator - however, Pluto's orbital inclination to the Earth's plane is more than that: A bit over 17 degrees.
      Earth's own axis is tilted 23.5 degrees, and as there's no obvious integer resonance between their orbital periods, Pluto will at some time be visible overhead at as
      high as +/- ~40.5 degrees (17+23.5) - which is surprisingly close to Chicago's latitude of ~41 degrees. So either they got lucky, or someone actually thought about that.

      However, Pluto right now is at 17.5 degrees south, so it will never be in zenith north of 6 degrees north (23.5-17.5) or - very roughly - Panama. And due to Pluto's loooooong orbital period of
      about 250 Earth years, this will not change significantly for a very long time.

      On an unrelated note: WhyTF is slashdot eating my degree signs - and not allowing the ampersand HTML entity?

  • by vmxeo (173325) on Friday March 06 2009, @09:02AM (#27090693) Homepage Journal
    CHICAGO - Federal authorities have indicted several Illinios Senators on corruption charges after an undercover investigation. According to tapes released, Senators called a number of planetoids asking "what they could get" for the title of planet. Rod Blagojevich was unavailable for comment.
  • by Povno (1460131) on Friday March 06 2009, @11:04AM (#27092169)
    Pluto: "I'm being what?"

    Astrological society: "Demoted... you're being demoted."

    Pluto: "I don't understand... why?"

    Astrological society: "Honestly, your just not up to code, you know? Most planets have certain criteria they must follow, criteria that you just don't meet. You understand right?"

    Pluto: "I sure as hell do not!"

    Astrological society: "Well, it's like this... realistically... well, your an ice cube, basically and well... we mistook for a real planet. But we do apologize for the confusion."

    Pluto: "OMG. This is so embarrassing."

    Illinois: "It's okay Pluto we understand. Hey... how would like to be governor? Seriously, we have a spot open all the time? Tell you what, if you agree to govern us then we'll let you be a planet."

    Pluto: "Uhm... you do realize that in all reality, I am a giant ice cube right?"

    Illinois: "That is neither her nor there... look, when the time is right... it'll happen. You seem like a smart fellow, and together I think we can get a lot accomplished. Just remember though, when things go bad, you have to go back to being an ice cube. We don't need you parading your mistakes around for the whole galaxy to see like that last guy."
    • Too right! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Xest (935314) on Friday March 06 2009, @07:56AM (#27090079)

      Yeah. I vote that Illinois also changes the definition of a mile and shortens it so that their residents can get more miles to the gallon! I also vote that they cut the definition of an hour down to 30mins to shorten my working day.

      Consensus and standards be damned, they're just definitions!

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Yeah. I vote that Illinois also changes the definition of a mile and shortens it so that their residents can get more miles to the gallon!

        Oh, I know, they could call it a kilometer. It could be that a mile is 1.6 kilometers.

      • by houghi (78078) on Friday March 06 2009, @08:11AM (#27090201) Homepage

        If they shorten the mile enough, they can also change the name to meter.

          • by AGMW (594303) on Friday March 06 2009, @11:53AM (#27092805) Homepage
            Yes, but the original intent is to say: my penis is a mile long.

            My penis IS a mile long, you insensit-
            ......Sorry, got a bit excited and blacked out there for a while ......
            -ive clod!

      • by value_added (719364) on Friday March 06 2009, @09:15AM (#27090851)

        Yeah. I vote that Illinois also changes the definition of a mile and shortens it so that their residents can get more miles to the gallon! I also vote that they cut the definition of an hour down to 30mins to shorten my working day.

        LOL. Next time it'll be a someone saying a gigabtye is 1,000,000,000 bytes!

      • Re:Too right! (Score:5, Interesting)

        by canajin56 (660655) on Friday March 06 2009, @11:00AM (#27092101)
        Isn't that how politicians do everything? No Child Left Behind tripled the amount of fresh veggies children were eating in cafeterias, by defining ketchup, relish, and French...sorry, FREEDOM fries as fresh vegetables, since they are all plant matter, and all WERE fresh before being cooked. Awesome work, children are eating healthier and they didn't even have to spend money on giving them different food than before! They also drastically reduced animal testing within the US by defining rodents and birds as non-animal vermin. For a grand finale, they redefined the poverty line, thus reducing the number of low income families! Then for an encore they changed the definition of what it means to be "unemployed" and drastically reduced unemployment! Truly amazing what you can to dramatically improve the country without doing anything other than changing the definitions of words!
            • Re:Too right! (Score:4, Informative)

              by autocracy (192714) <slashdot2007@@@storyinmemo...com> on Friday March 06 2009, @09:23AM (#27090923) Homepage
              No... you missed my point. Eight planets in the solar system, sure. The Universe is much larger, and other planets have been identified. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet#Extrasolar_planets [wikipedia.org] is a start.
              • Re:Too right! (Score:4, Informative)

                by rumith (983060) on Friday March 06 2009, @11:32AM (#27092491)
                The IAU definition of a planet [iau.org] says: The IAU therefore resolves that planets and other bodies, except satellites, in our Solar System be defined into three distinct categories in the following way: (1) A planet 1 is a celestial body that (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit. (2) A "dwarf planet" is a celestial body that (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape 2 , (c) has not cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit, and (d) is not a satellite. (3) All other objects 3 ,except satellites, orbiting the Sun shall be referred to collectively as "Small Solar System Bodies".

                As you can see, the word 'planet' is only defined for the Solar system. There are no planets outside of it - those are exoplanets! And we do not currently possess enough data to make conclusions if their generation process and other characteristics has anything to do with our planets'

    • There are now 8 planets in the UNIVERSE because they defined a planet as a body orbiting the sun. The definition sucks so I have no problem if states are defining a planet as something else than a small club of grey men(IAU).

      You can say that it's "just a definition", but I don't see where it's the place of a legislature to make scientific definitions to scientists. Legislatures supposedly have better things to do. If they don't, they should recess until that changes.

      The IAU definition of a planet is more extensive than that. Also, while I haven't read the IAU text, I doubt their definition means that there are only eight planets in the universe. The only thing I don't like about their definition is that their use of "dwarf" in "dwarf planet" basically means "not a planet", and I think that's inconsistent and improper use of the word.

    • by jellomizer (103300) on Friday March 06 2009, @08:07AM (#27090163)

      Well it depends on how you define SUN
      Our Sun is a star called Sol We call it the Sun because it is what we are in orbit around. If we were in orbit around an other star we would call that Star the Sun.

      The more formal defination of a Planet is the following.

      1. It Orbits around a Sun.
      2. Its shape is Spherical
      3. It is large enough to have or can attract and clear up other objects in its orbit.

      #3 is the problem with Pluto with its orbit crossing Neptune once the time gets right and Neptune gets to close it will just Suck up Pluto and not the other way around. So even it Pluto was the size of the earth if it was where Pluto is now it wouldn't be considered a planet.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 06 2009, @08:52AM (#27090585)

        Neptune will never "suck up" Pluto. They are in a 3:2 mean motion resonance, so although their orbits cross, they will never collide.

        http://www.nineplanets.org/plutodyn.html [nineplanets.org]
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_resonance [wikipedia.org]

      • by will_die (586523) on Friday March 06 2009, @09:32AM (#27091041) Homepage
        The official name of our sun is Sun. Sol is commonly used in science fiction but is just latin for sun and is not the official name.
        The is the same as our moon the official name is Moon, it is commonly referred to in sci-fi as Luna.
        So if you were in orbit around a planet that orbits a different star you could refer to it as the local star or local sun or by its official name, such as the 2nd nearest star to us being Proxima Centauri (of the Alpha Centauri solar system).
        • by MartinSchou (1360093) on Friday March 06 2009, @10:10AM (#27091513)

          The problem with having Pluto being a regular planet not that you have nine planets, it's that you end up with a much larger number of planets as a lot of kuiper belt objects are better matches for planet status than Pluto.

          Pluto doesn't look like any of the other planets in other ways, such as having a 'moon' so big that its center of mass isn't inside itself. In fact Charon is 11% of Pluto's mass, and while the Moon (Luna) looks huge, its mass is only 1% of the Earth's.

          Just as interesting, Charon doesn't orbit Pluto, making it the only 'planet' with a non-orbiting satellite. Aditionally this satelitte has a mean distance that is less than 20 times Pluto's radius. To put that in perspective, that'd make the Moon orbit at 120,000 km - about a third that of its current orbit. And if we wanted to put it even more into perspective, the Moon would also have to grow significantly to something like 3 times its current size (haven't done the math). While that would be interesting from an astronomical point of view, I'm fairly certain we wouldn't enjoy the increased gravitational pull. If you think high tide is bad now, imagine what it'd be like if the ground itself moved up and down with the tides.

          We use definitions, like the word planet, to make things easier. If we can use one definition to describe the planets, and then have to go "oh, and it's okay if they don't lie in the same plane as everything else, as long as they're no more than 50 AU away from the Sun, and have a huge eccentric orbit compared to every other planet", then it doesn't really fit the same definition.

          In fact, just looking at orbital eccentricity it'd difficult to argue that Pluto (and Mercury) is in the same class as the other 7 planets. Mercury has a slight excuse since it's 100 times closer to the sun.

          But, to jump on your main point:
          "declaring that what everyone had said was a planet for the last 80 years is now not one"

          That's the thing about science. Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it'd stop.

          What have we discovered/come to realise in the last 80 years, that we took for granted back then? How about asbestos not being good for you [wikipedia.org]? Smoking not being good for you? That you could in fact go faster than the speed of sound? That DDT isn't the safest way to get rid of bugs?

          How about something a bit more down to earth? Like plate tectonics [wikipedia.org]. I mean, if you were to go back in time to the 1930s, when Pluto was discovered, and told people that the earth's surface was made up of large slabs of rock, floating on an inner sea of molten rock, and that these massive plates moved, shifting continents around and that the Earth of today looks nothing like the earth of 100 million years ago, you'd either be comitted to mental 'care', or just outright laughed at.

          But, if you prefer sticking to your guns, defending something that we thought was correct 80 years ago, then why not do one better and defend astrology. That's even older.

    • by thomasdz (178114) on Friday March 06 2009, @08:08AM (#27090171)

      Yo mama is so fat...Illinois declared her a planet
      Yo mama is so ugly, astronomers who look at her think they're looking at Jupiter's moon IO
      Yo mama is so old, her boyfriends CARBON-date her
      Yo mama is so old and fat, her stomach is actually fusing helium with neon to produce magnesium just before she turns into a neutron star!
      Yo mama is so ugly, that when computer scientists look at her, they are immediately reminded of Edsger Dijkstra's letter "Go To Statement Considered Harmful" because they don't want to "Go To" her.

      Ok, that last one got me severely beaten up on the playground when I was a kid, but the rest are funny and hardly trollish.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 06 2009, @08:56AM (#27090629)

        You used Edsger Dijkstra references as a kid? I don't think it was the "Yo mama" insults that got you beat up on the playground!

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Easy to solve, does the first lesson in the morning start with a bell ? Does the last one in the evening end with a bell ? And if it's like Europe where church bells ring every hour (including the damn night), all bets are off.
    • by iris-n (1276146) on Friday March 06 2009, @09:25AM (#27090959)

      Well, Pluto's orbit is about 16Â farther from the plane than Earth's. Illinois' latitude is about 37Â, and Earth's axial tilt is about 23.5Â. So, we can have a minimum of 13.5Â of Illinois' "overhead" to the earth's plane, and a maximum of 60.5Â. So the orbit of Pluto is indeed overhead Illinois many times in the american summer. The odds that Pluto itself is in the spot are astronomically (literally) low.

      PS: Fuck slashdot and it's lack of unicode support. And while we're at it, inline TeX would be nice to.

    • by Electrawn (321224) <electrawn.yahoo@com> on Friday March 06 2009, @12:23PM (#27093215)

      With Blago, Burris, Todd Stroger's extreme Cook county sales taxes (Chicago for the rest of you), Sheriff Tom Dart suing craigslist...

      I'm embarrassed to live here. Passing a "Pluto is a planet" resolution is over the top for this legislature compared with all the other fun stuff going on. It furthers Illinois as a laughing stock, tarnishing the reputation of the state, it's people and businesses.

      That is reason enough to get my goat, straw that bropke the camels back per se and make some phone calls and try and remind my representatives to get the bleep on track.