QUOTE (nprev @ Jun 13 2008, 05:54 AM)
Therefore, the term 'planet', undoubtedly like most of our terminology for probably all nouns, is subjective. Fomenting long, bitter debates over what does and what does not "deserve" this term doesn't serve any practical purpose at all, and frankly might become a seriocomic, rather embarrassing spectacle in the eyes of the general public...who well might be wondering why all these PhDs making the mythical big bucks are wasting time on the issue.
All true, but I think it's unwise to just dismiss this issue as a squabble or an irrelevence. As I said at the time, although it did make sense scientifically - from a "terminology tidying up" point of view - the fundamental problem with this particular case was that it was a change of identity for an object that was lodged in the public's consciousness as firmly and securely as a mountaineering spike hammered into the side of El Capitan. I have had soooo many discussions with people about this, and the overwhelming majority were of the opinion that Pluto had been a planet for over 70 years, why did "you people" (i.e. me, i.e. astronomer types) just decide to change it? And in all honesty I can't defend the change, I just can't. Personally I think it would have been excusable and understandable to the IAU to throw its hands up and, for once, look up from its computer screens and fat books of tables and figures and definitions, acknowledge sentimentality and tradition and just crown Pluto as an "Honourary planet", but declare that That Was That, and from now on new rules would apply. The whole "dwarf planet" thing was simply embarrassing, a real fudge, and now this "plutoid" term is going to further cloud already muddy waters.
This isn't just my ranting opinion here, it's based on experience out there, in the real world, where the people I talk to in community centres, school halls, museums, libraries and the like during my Outreach talks are now genuinely confused by this. And trust me, many of them now believe that, well, if small groups of astronomers can go around changing things like this, then astronomy IS a stuffy old science after all, for wild-haired scientists with patches on their elbows, which, when science is already being challenged to tackle global warming, scientists are trying to push back the growling tsunami of "Intelligent Design" and Creationism, speak up for manned and unmanned space exploration and convince people that no, cave men and dinosaurs did not fight it out, is disastrous, IMO.
Then there's the problem in schools. Word hasn't filtered through the system into the classrooms yet, not here anyway, and when I had to tell a roomful of 8 and 9 year olds on Monday morning that Pluto - represented by a cute little brown-paper covered ball, hanging down from a piece of string that spanned their classroom - wasn't a planet after all, they were confused, disappointed and angry all at once. Boy, did it take some explaining that a tiny number of people, in a hall, had decided that Pluto wasn't a planet after all, maybe 15 mins eaten out of my hour-long talk. But as it's official now I towed the official party line and passed on the new knowledge as a good Outreacher is obliged to do, and now all those kids and their teacher know that Pluto isn't a planet but a "dwarf planet" - I am NOT going back to tell them it's a "plutoid" too! - so yaay me...
Change is necessary, essential, I'm not questioning that. And yes, with its weird orbit, small size and odd behaviour Pluto was, and still is, and I feel always will be, a big, ugly, fat black fly sitting smack in the middle of the pot of lovely white ointment that is the "official" view of our solar system, but seriously, what an absolute **** up this has all been.