| |
Main
Date: 16 Aug 2006 18:30:52
From: Thomas Lee Elifritz
Subject: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
I guess I’m ok with this. We get a fifth planet, representing asteroids,
the Sun is the Origin (0), and everything else 10 and above is a pluton.
Then there are the plutinos, and apparantly a wholelotta pluterinos.
Jeez, there’s a lot of purple ice out there.
http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=164
http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=115
|
|
| |
Date: 17 Aug 2006 03:22:12
From: robert casey
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
> I guess I’m ok with this.
Well, it would make Bode's law work better, though it doesn't do Neptune
too well....
|
| |
Date: 17 Aug 2006 01:34:49
From: Make Exxon Pay Its Damages
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
Thomas Lee Elifritz <cosmic@lifeform.org > wrote in news:KVNEg.221$yB3.188@newsfe02.lga:
> I guess I’m ok with this. We get a fifth planet, representing asteroids,
> the Sun is the Origin (0), and everything else 10 and above is a pluton.
> Then there are the plutinos, and apparantly a wholelotta pluterinos.
>
> Jeez, there’s a lot of purple ice out there.
>
> http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=164
>
> http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=115
>
Considering that the asteroids likely were a failed planet at some distant past, I'm ok with that too.
|
| | |
Date: 16 Aug 2006 20:45:24
From: Starlord
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
Considering that the asteroids likely were a failed planet at some distant
past, I'm ok with that too
NOPE, they are a left over belt from the start of the system, just as the k
belt and ort cloud.
--
The Lone Sidewalk Astronomer of Rosamond
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Sidewalk Astronomy
www.sidewalkastronomy.info
Astronomy Net Online Gift Shop
http://www.cafepress.com/astronomy_net
In Garden Online Gift Shop
http://www.cafepress.com/ingarden
Blast Off Online Gift Shop
http://www.cafepress.com/starlords
Astro Blog
http://starlord.bloggerteam.com/
"Make Exxon Pay Its Damages" <Exxon_Serial_Killers@RacketeersR.US > wrote in
message news:Xns9821BCD51E6DAcladiusdenksbcglobal@207.115.17.102...
> Thomas Lee Elifritz <cosmic@lifeform.org> wrote in
> news:KVNEg.221$yB3.188@newsfe02.lga:
>
>> I guess I'm ok with this. We get a fifth planet, representing asteroids,
>> the Sun is the Origin (0), and everything else 10 and above is a pluton.
>> Then there are the plutinos, and apparantly a wholelotta pluterinos.
>>
>> Jeez, there's a lot of purple ice out there.
>>
>> http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=164
>>
>> http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=115
>>
>
> Considering that the asteroids likely were a failed planet at some distant
> past, I'm ok with that too.
|
| | | |
Date: 04 Oct 2006 23:02:54
From: Thomas Lee Elifritz
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
Starlord wrote:
> Considering that the asteroids likely were a failed planet at some distant
> past, I'm ok with that too
>
> NOPE, they are a left over belt from the start of the system, just as the k
> belt and ort cloud.
Yes, they failed to form a planet, that's what he just said.
But now we know they did form a planet : Ceres.
Ceres is itself an interloper, I think.
http://cosmic.lifeform.org
|
| | | | |
Date: 17 Aug 2006 14:51:30
From: beav
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
On Wed, 04 2006 23:02:54 -0500, Thomas Lee Elifritz
<cosmic@lifeform.org > wrote:
>Starlord wrote:
>
>> Considering that the asteroids likely were a failed planet at some distant
>> past, I'm ok with that too
>>
>> NOPE, they are a left over belt from the start of the system, just as the k
>> belt and ort cloud.
>
>Yes, they failed to form a planet, that's what he just said.
>
>But now we know they did form a planet : Ceres.
>
>Ceres is itself an interloper, I think.
>
>http://cosmic.lifeform.org
what? now you're naswereing yourself in the third person?
who are you? Bob Dole?
|
| | | | |
Date: 17 Aug 2006 13:49:43
From: Leon Trollski
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
"Thomas Lee Elifritz" <cosmic@lifeform.org > wrote in message
news:NUREg.95$hM3.84@newsfe04.lga...
> Starlord wrote:
>
> > Considering that the asteroids likely were a failed planet at some
distant
> > past, I'm ok with that too
> >
> > NOPE, they are a left over belt from the start of the system, just as
the k
> > belt and ort cloud.
>
> Yes, they failed to form a planet, that's what he just said.
>
> But now we know they did form a planet : Ceres.
>
Now we know, lol, it was discovered in 1801 focktaard:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_Ceres
> Ceres is itself an interloper, I think.
>
> http://cosmic.lifeform.org
|
| | |
Date: 16 Aug 2006 20:45:14
From: Thomas Lee Elifritz
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
Make Exxon Pay Its Damages wrote:
> Thomas Lee Elifritz <cosmic@lifeform.org> wrote in news:KVNEg.221$yB3.188@newsfe02.lga:
>
>> I guess I’m ok with this. We get a fifth planet, representing asteroids,
>> the Sun is the Origin (0), and everything else 10 and above is a pluton.
>> Then there are the plutinos, and apparantly a wholelotta pluterinos.
>>
>> Jeez, there’s a lot of purple ice out there.
>>
>> http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=164
>>
>> http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=115
>>
>
> Considering that the asteroids likely were a failed planet at some distant past, I'm ok with that too.
It makes a lot of sense, and science and astronomy has already gotten a
HUGE amount of good Public Relations PR value from all of this arguing.
Because of Jupiter, Mars was severely retarded, and the putative fifth
planet was completely disrupted, such that largest that was able to form
just barely squeaks by. We're lucky to have something there like that at
all in that spot, it's just perfect. In this counting scheme, Jupiter
and Saturn just become numbers 6 and 7, and Neptune and Uranus become
numbers 8 and 9, and everything 10 and above become the Plutons, since
nothing much is presumably going to change in the inner solar system
anytime soon. Unless they find some sort of bizarre long period planet X
or something, but dynamically there is very little evidence for that.
So basically there are 10 planetary systems, and a bunch or renegades.
Ceres is extraordinarily unique, we need to go there very soon.
http://cosmic.lifeform.org
|
| | | |
Date: 17 Aug 2006 02:11:34
From: Make Exxon Pay Its Damages
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
Thomas Lee Elifritz <cosmic@lifeform.org > wrote in
news:ITPEg.76$hM3.7@newsfe04.lga:
> Make Exxon Pay Its Damages wrote:
>> Thomas Lee Elifritz <cosmic@lifeform.org> wrote in
>> news:KVNEg.221$yB3.188@newsfe02.lga:
>>
>>> I guess I’m ok with this. We get a fifth planet, representing
>>> asteroids, the Sun is the Origin (0), and everything else 10 and above
>>> is a pluton. Then there are the plutinos, and apparantly a wholelotta
>>> pluterinos.
>>>
>>> Jeez, there’s a lot of purple ice out there.
>>>
>>> http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=164
>>>
>>> http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=115
>>>
>>
>> Considering that the asteroids likely were a failed planet at some
>> distant past, I'm ok with that too.
>
> It makes a lot of sense, and science and astronomy has already gotten a
> HUGE amount of good Public Relations PR value from all of this arguing.
>
> Because of Jupiter, Mars was severely retarded, and the putative fifth
> planet was completely disrupted, such that largest that was able to form
> just barely squeaks by. We're lucky to have something there like that at
> all in that spot, it's just perfect. In this counting scheme, Jupiter
> and Saturn just become numbers 6 and 7, and Neptune and Uranus become
> numbers 8 and 9, and everything 10 and above become the Plutons, since
> nothing much is presumably going to change in the inner solar system
> anytime soon. Unless they find some sort of bizarre long period planet X
> or something, but dynamically there is very little evidence for that.
>
> So basically there are 10 planetary systems, and a bunch or renegades.
>
> Ceres is extraordinarily unique, we need to go there very soon.
>
> http://cosmic.lifeform.org
>
I already made my position clear on that. I ain't going in a cramped
tincan. A habitat built in zero-g drydocks the size of an O'Neill habitat,
and nothing less! The TV series Star-Trek Next Generation showed crew
quarters, bedrooms, half the size of a football field. The most abundant
thing there is in space is SPACE.
The Mothersip in Close Encounters of the Third Kind is what makes sense.
Five years in less space than a WWII submarine, head inches away from
crewmen's feet who hasn't had a real bath in years, is not my definition
of fun and adventure.
When I cruise past Mars, not the most interesting place on the itinerary,
there will be a fleet of hundreds of lander vehicles. It's not a Bushite
nightmare scenario. Geez, he even gets Mars screwed up in his dreams.
|
| | | | |
Date: 20 Aug 2006 03:08:02
From: Frank Glover
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
Make Exxon Pay Its Damages wrote:
>
> I already made my position clear on that. I ain't going in a cramped
> tincan. A habitat built in zero-g drydocks the size of an O'Neill habitat,
> and nothing less! The TV series Star-Trek Next Generation showed crew
> quarters, bedrooms, half the size of a football field. The most abundant
> thing there is in space is SPACE.
>
> The Mothersip in Close Encounters of the Third Kind is what makes sense.
> Five years in less space than a WWII submarine, head inches away from
> crewmen's feet who hasn't had a real bath in years, is not my definition
> of fun and adventure.
>
> When I cruise past Mars, not the most interesting place on the itinerary,
> there will be a fleet of hundreds of lander vehicles. It's not a Bushite
> nightmare scenario. Geez, he even gets Mars screwed up in his dreams.
Show me the propulsion systems that can move masses like
Enterprise/The Mothership around at decent speeds, and I'll give some
consideration to what you might personally want. (Both seem to be
reactionless, something we don't know to be possible.)
Columbus and Magellan didn't wait for the ship technology of The
Love Boat, We won't either.
--
Frank
You know what to remove to reply...
Check out my web page: http://www.geocities.com/stardolphin1/link2.htm
"Man who say it cannot be done, should not interrupt man doing it."
- Chinese Proverb
|
| |
Date: 17 Aug 2006 00:34:46
From: Leon Trollski
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
"Thomas Lee Elifritz" <cosmic@lifeform.org > wrote in message
news:KVNEg.221$yB3.188@newsfe02.lga...
> I guess I’m ok with this. We get a fifth planet, representing asteroids,
> the Sun is the Origin (0), and everything else 10 and above is a pluton.
> Then there are the plutinos, and apparantly a wholelotta pluterinos.
>
> Jeez, there’s a lot of purple ice out there.
>
> http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=164
>
> http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=115
What a bunch of crap. Soon we'll have a dozen and more new 'planets' added
to the solar system, all because the Americans are too egotistical not to
let Pluto drop off the list, as the only one discovered by one of their own.
Fucking Americans, I hate them.
|
| | |
Date: 17 Aug 2006 07:33:09
From:
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
Leon Trollski writes:
> What a bunch of crap. Soon we'll have a dozen and more new 'planets' added
> to the solar system, all because the Americans are too egotistical not to
> let Pluto drop off the list, as the only one discovered by one of their own.
>
> Fucking Americans, I hate them.
The committee making the proposal is an international one.
But don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant.
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Aug 2006 02:52:16
From: Joseph Lazio
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
>>>>> "t" == tholen <tholen@antispam.ham> writes:
t > Leon Trollski writes:
>> What a bunch of crap. Soon we'll have a dozen and more new
>> 'planets' added to the solar system, all because the Americans are
>> too egotistical not to let Pluto drop off the list, as the only one
>> discovered by one of their own.
>>
>> Fucking Americans, I hate them.
t > The committee making the proposal is an international one.
And the opposition to the proposal here at the IAU also appears to be
international.
t > But don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant.
Right!
--
Lt. Lazio, HTML police
|
| | |
Date: 18 Aug 2006 11:19:11
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: 2006 IAU 12 planets resolution petition
|
osdfey wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 01:46:20 -0700, mirceaar wrote:
>
>> At
>> http://www.petitiononline.com/9planets/petition.html
>> you will find a petition that considers that the current resolution of
>> IAU regarding the definition of a planet is currently innapropriate.
>> Although it does not provide another definition for planet - which is
>> rather a difficult one - it considers that the stated definition will
>> create confusion more than anything else, not necessarily within the
>> scientific community, but with people in general. The petition text is
>> written by an amateur astronomer, so don't expect much scientific
>> eloquence.
>
> The new IAU definition is great. The ONLY reason anyone is against it is
> because 9 planets is so ingrained into pop-culture.
Really? How arrogant to dismiss the opinions of others so easily.
It just so happens that I and others have a whole list of reasons to be
against it, and none of them have anything to do with "ingrained pop
culture."
My advice is to stick to your own views rather than belittle the views
of others.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/comets.html
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | |
Date: 19 Aug 2006 15:13:51
From: Paul Schlyter
Subject: Re: 2006 IAU 12 planets resolution petition
|
In article <6061d$44e5f682$4212a5f6$25911@TULAROSA.NET >,
Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyoureye@yahoo.com > wrote:
> osdfey wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 01:46:20 -0700, mirceaar wrote:
>>
>>> At
>>> http://www.petitiononline.com/9planets/petition.html
>>> you will find a petition that considers that the current resolution of
>>> IAU regarding the definition of a planet is currently innapropriate.
>>> Although it does not provide another definition for planet - which is
>>> rather a difficult one - it considers that the stated definition will
>>> create confusion more than anything else, not necessarily within the
>>> scientific community, but with people in general. The petition text is
>>> written by an amateur astronomer, so don't expect much scientific
>>> eloquence.
>>
>> The new IAU definition is great. The ONLY reason anyone is against it is
>> because 9 planets is so ingrained into pop-culture.
>
> Really? How arrogant to dismiss the opinions of others so easily.
>
> It just so happens that I and others have a whole list of reasons to be
> against it, and none of them have anything to do with "ingrained pop
> culture."
>
> My advice is to stick to your own views rather than belittle the views
> of others.
Otoh it's good if people could agree on a definition, instead of having
each and every person define "planet" in their own personal way....
> --
> Greg Crinklaw
> Astronomical Software Developer
> Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
>
> SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
> Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
> Comets: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/comets.html
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/
|
| |
Date: 17 Aug 11:29:21
From: Lloyd Parker
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
In article <KVNEg.221$yB3.188@newsfe02.lga >,
Thomas Lee Elifritz <cosmic@lifeform.org > wrote:
>I guess I’m ok with this. We get a fifth planet, representing asteroids,
>the Sun is the Origin (0), and everything else 10 and above is a pluton.
>Then there are the plutinos, and apparantly a wholelotta pluterinos.
>
>Jeez, there’s a lot of purple ice out there.
>
>http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=164
>
>http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=115
I don't understand how they can make Charon a planet, though, since it orbits
Pluto, not the sun.
|
| | |
Date: 17 Aug 2006 17:24:51
From: David G. Nagel
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
Lloyd Parker wrote:
> In article <KVNEg.221$yB3.188@newsfe02.lga>,
> Thomas Lee Elifritz <cosmic@lifeform.org> wrote:
>
>>I guess I’m ok with this. We get a fifth planet, representing asteroids,
>>the Sun is the Origin (0), and everything else 10 and above is a pluton.
>>Then there are the plutinos, and apparantly a wholelotta pluterinos.
>>
>>Jeez, there’s a lot of purple ice out there.
>>
>>http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=164
>>
>>http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=115
>
>
> I don't understand how they can make Charon a planet, though, since it orbits
> Pluto, not the sun.
The center of the Pluto/Charon system is outside the surface of either
object.
Dave N
|
| | |
Date: 17 Aug 2006 12:08:14
From: Brian Thorn
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
On Thu, 17 Aug 06 11:29:21 GMT, lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>I don't understand how they can make Charon a planet, though, since it orbits
>Pluto, not the sun.
Charon and Pluto orbit a common point in between them.
Brian
|
| | | |
Date: 17 Aug 13:15:41
From: Lloyd Parker
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
In article <7j89e21c0mh3holg38du7viv0tnur795q9@4ax.com >,
Brian Thorn <bthorn64@cox.net > wrote:
>On Thu, 17 Aug 06 11:29:21 GMT, lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>wrote:
>
>
>>I don't understand how they can make Charon a planet, though, since it
orbits
>>Pluto, not the sun.
>
>Charon and Pluto orbit a common point in between them.
>
>Brian
But that's begging the question. Earth's moon does that too, and it's bigger
than Charon, isn't it?
|
| | | | |
Date: 18 Aug 2006 00:15:44
From: robert casey
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
>
> But that's begging the question. Earth's moon does that too, and it's bigger
> than Charon, isn't it?
Last winter I saw the full Moon almost directly overhead at midnight,
and the center of mass of the Earth Moon system was a thousand miles
below my feet.
|
| | | | |
Date: 17 Aug 2006 17:25:43
From: David G. Nagel
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
Lloyd Parker wrote:
> In article <7j89e21c0mh3holg38du7viv0tnur795q9@4ax.com>,
> Brian Thorn <bthorn64@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 17 Aug 06 11:29:21 GMT, lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I don't understand how they can make Charon a planet, though, since it
>
> orbits
>
>>>Pluto, not the sun.
>>
>>Charon and Pluto orbit a common point in between them.
>>
>>Brian
>
>
> But that's begging the question. Earth's moon does that too, and it's bigger
> than Charon, isn't it?
I think that the Terra/Luna center of mass is inside the surface of
Terra. I may be wrong.
Dave N
|
| | | | | |
Date: 18 Aug 11:42:27
From: Lloyd Parker
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
In article <12e9r78b80snr39@corp.supernews.com >,
"David G. Nagel" <nagel@core.com > wrote:
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>> In article <7j89e21c0mh3holg38du7viv0tnur795q9@4ax.com>,
>> Brian Thorn <bthorn64@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 17 Aug 06 11:29:21 GMT, lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I don't understand how they can make Charon a planet, though, since it
>>
>> orbits
>>
>>>>Pluto, not the sun.
>>>
>>>Charon and Pluto orbit a common point in between them.
>>>
>>>Brian
>>
>>
>> But that's begging the question. Earth's moon does that too, and it's
bigger
>> than Charon, isn't it?
>
>
>I think that the Terra/Luna center of mass is inside the surface of
>Terra. I may be wrong.
>
>Dave N
My problem is calling Pluto and Charon 2 planets, when they're in one
planetary orbit. It's like calling a duplex 2 houses, or a car towing a
trailer 2 vehicles.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 18 Aug 2006 11:47:54
From: Thomas Lee Elifritz
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
Lloyd Parker wrote:
> In article <12e9r78b80snr39@corp.supernews.com>,
> "David G. Nagel" <nagel@core.com> wrote:
>> Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>
>>> In article <7j89e21c0mh3holg38du7viv0tnur795q9@4ax.com>,
>>> Brian Thorn <bthorn64@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 17 Aug 06 11:29:21 GMT, lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I don't understand how they can make Charon a planet, though, since it
>>> orbits
>>>
>>>>> Pluto, not the sun.
>>>> Charon and Pluto orbit a common point in between them.
>>>>
>>>> Brian
>>>
>>> But that's begging the question. Earth's moon does that too, and it's
> bigger
>>> than Charon, isn't it?
>>
>> I think that the Terra/Luna center of mass is inside the surface of
>> Terra. I may be wrong.
>>
>> Dave N
>
> My problem is calling Pluto and Charon 2 planets, when they're in one
> planetary orbit. It's like calling a duplex 2 houses, or a car towing a
> trailer 2 vehicles.
It's a double planet.
Just call Ceres a planet, ignore the plutons, and we still have nine.
http://cosmic.lifeform.org
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 21 Aug 2006 14:16:42
From: beav
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
On Fri, 18 Aug 06 11:42:27 GMT, lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>In article <12e9r78b80snr39@corp.supernews.com>,
> "David G. Nagel" <nagel@core.com> wrote:
>>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>
>>> In article <7j89e21c0mh3holg38du7viv0tnur795q9@4ax.com>,
>>> Brian Thorn <bthorn64@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 17 Aug 06 11:29:21 GMT, lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I don't understand how they can make Charon a planet, though, since it
>>>
>>> orbits
>>>
>>>>>Pluto, not the sun.
>>>>
>>>>Charon and Pluto orbit a common point in between them.
>>>>
>>>>Brian
>>>
>>>
>>> But that's begging the question. Earth's moon does that too, and it's
>bigger
>>> than Charon, isn't it?
>>
>>
>>I think that the Terra/Luna center of mass is inside the surface of
>>Terra. I may be wrong.
>>
>>Dave N
>
>My problem is calling Pluto and Charon 2 planets, when they're in one
>planetary orbit. It's like calling a duplex 2 houses, or a car towing a
>trailer 2 vehicles.
the same issue sticks with Ceres. its like calling the biggest rock
in a landslide the only important object.
this "definition" stinks.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 21 Aug 2006 09:25:29
From: Thomas Lee Elifritz
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
beav wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Aug 06 11:42:27 GMT, lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
> wrote:
>
>> In article <12e9r78b80snr39@corp.supernews.com>,
>> "David G. Nagel" <nagel@core.com> wrote:
>>> Lloyd Parker wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <7j89e21c0mh3holg38du7viv0tnur795q9@4ax.com>,
>>>> Brian Thorn <bthorn64@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 17 Aug 06 11:29:21 GMT, lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't understand how they can make Charon a planet, though, since it
>>>> orbits
>>>>
>>>>>> Pluto, not the sun.
>>>>> Charon and Pluto orbit a common point in between them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Brian
>>>>
>>>> But that's begging the question. Earth's moon does that too, and it's
>> bigger
>>>> than Charon, isn't it?
>>>
>>> I think that the Terra/Luna center of mass is inside the surface of
>>> Terra. I may be wrong.
>>>
>>> Dave N
>> My problem is calling Pluto and Charon 2 planets, when they're in one
>> planetary orbit. It's like calling a duplex 2 houses, or a car towing a
>> trailer 2 vehicles.
>
>
> the same issue sticks with Ceres. its like calling the biggest rock
> in a landslide the only important object.
>
> this "definition" stinks.
Well you racist piece of planetary shit.
http://cosmic.lifeform.org
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 02 Sep 2006 21:41:54
From: Fred J. McCall
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote:
:My problem is calling Pluto and Charon 2 planets, when they're in one
:planetary orbit. It's like calling a duplex 2 houses, or a car towing a
:trailer 2 vehicles.
Uh, a duplex IS two houses. Both the car and the trailer need license
plates, so the car towing a trailer IS two vehicles.
So what you're really saying is that your problem is reality and you
want something different.
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 03 Sep 2006 10:14:00
From: Paul Schlyter
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
In article <gjujf2hcml749ul0i2tt5973uokfi256ns@4ax.com >,
Fred J. McCall <fmccall@earthlink.net > wrote:
> lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote:
>
> :My problem is calling Pluto and Charon 2 planets, when they're in one
> :planetary orbit. It's like calling a duplex 2 houses, or a car towing a
> :trailer 2 vehicles.
>
> Uh, a duplex IS two houses. Both the car and the trailer need license
> plates, so the car towing a trailer IS two vehicles.
A vehicle may not even need a license plate to be a vehicle: a bicycle
needs no license plate, but a bicycle is still a vehicle.
> So what you're really saying is that your problem is reality and you
> want something different.
>
> --
> "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
> territory."
> --G. Behn
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 04 Sep 10:41:03
From: Lloyd Parker
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
In article <gjujf2hcml749ul0i2tt5973uokfi256ns@4ax.com >,
Fred J. McCall <fmccall@earthlink.net > wrote:
>lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote:
>
>:My problem is calling Pluto and Charon 2 planets, when they're in one
>:planetary orbit. It's like calling a duplex 2 houses, or a car towing a
>:trailer 2 vehicles.
>
>Uh, a duplex IS two houses.
Oh really? Check out the property tax assessment.
>Both the car and the trailer need license
>plates, so the car towing a trailer IS two vehicles.
>
>So what you're really saying is that your problem is reality and you
>want something different.
>
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 04 Sep 2006 17:13:24
From: Paul Schlyter
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
In article <edhduj$av6$14@leto.cc.emory.edu >,
Lloyd Parker <lparker@emory.edu > wrote:
> In article <gjujf2hcml749ul0i2tt5973uokfi256ns@4ax.com>,
> Fred J. McCall <fmccall@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote:
>>
>>:My problem is calling Pluto and Charon 2 planets, when they're in one
>>:planetary orbit. It's like calling a duplex 2 houses, or a car towing a
>>:trailer 2 vehicles.
>>
>>h, a duplex IS two houses.
>
> Oh really? Check out the property tax assessment.
"Property" and "house" are not necessarily the same thing. There can
be more than one house on one single property. And you pay tax per
property, not per house.
>> Both the car and the trailer need license
>> plates, so the car towing a trailer IS two vehicles.
>>
>> So what you're really saying is that your problem is reality and you
>> want something different.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 04 Sep 15:07:26
From: Lloyd Parker
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
In article <edhldt$2e7j$1@merope.saaf.se >,
pausch@saaf.se (Paul Schlyter) wrote:
>In article <edhduj$av6$14@leto.cc.emory.edu>,
>Lloyd Parker <lparker@emory.edu> wrote:
>
>> In article <gjujf2hcml749ul0i2tt5973uokfi256ns@4ax.com>,
>> Fred J. McCall <fmccall@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote:
>>>
>>>:My problem is calling Pluto and Charon 2 planets, when they're in one
>>>:planetary orbit. It's like calling a duplex 2 houses, or a car towing a
>>>:trailer 2 vehicles.
>>>
>>>h, a duplex IS two houses.
>>
>> Oh really? Check out the property tax assessment.
>
>"Property" and "house" are not necessarily the same thing. There can
>be more than one house on one single property. And you pay tax per
>property, not per house.
Then is a motel 100 houses?
>
>>> Both the car and the trailer need license
>>> plates, so the car towing a trailer IS two vehicles.
>>>
>>> So what you're really saying is that your problem is reality and you
>>> want something different.
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 04 Sep 2006 22:00:22
From: The Ghost In The Machine
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
In sci.environment, Lloyd Parker
<lparker@emory.edu >
wrote
on Mon, 04 Sep 06 15:07:26 GMT
<edhti2$skc$2@leto.cc.emory.edu >:
> In article <edhldt$2e7j$1@merope.saaf.se>,
> pausch@saaf.se (Paul Schlyter) wrote:
>>In article <edhduj$av6$14@leto.cc.emory.edu>,
>>Lloyd Parker <lparker@emory.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <gjujf2hcml749ul0i2tt5973uokfi256ns@4ax.com>,
>>> Fred J. McCall <fmccall@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>>lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>:My problem is calling Pluto and Charon 2 planets, when they're in one
>>>>:planetary orbit. It's like calling a duplex 2 houses, or a car towing a
>>>>:trailer 2 vehicles.
>>>>
>>>>h, a duplex IS two houses.
>>>
>>> Oh really? Check out the property tax assessment.
>>
>>"Property" and "house" are not necessarily the same thing. There can
>>be more than one house on one single property. And you pay tax per
>>property, not per house.
>
> Then is a motel 100 houses?
A motel might very well have 100 living spaces, each with kitchenette,
bathroom facilities, bedroom(s), etc. Some of the hotels in SF are
specifically for the homeless, that much I know.
Houses, no.
I suspect the rent helps pay for the property tax assessments and the
mortgage, but not directly.
[rest snipped]
--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Windows Vista. Because it's time to refresh your hardware. Trust us.
|
| | | | |
Date: 17 Aug 2006 16:57:39
From: Brian Thorn
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
On Thu, 17 Aug 06 13:15:41 GMT, lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>>Charon and Pluto orbit a common point in between them.
>But that's begging the question. Earth's moon does that too,
Nope, the center of gravity between Earth and Moon is still beneath
the surface of the Earth.
Brian
|
| | | | | |
Date: 17 Aug 2006 16:59:57
From: Thomas Lee Elifritz
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
Brian Thorn wrote:
>>> Charon and Pluto orbit a common point in between them.
>
>> But that's begging the question. Earth's moon does that too,
>
> Nope, the center of gravity between Earth and Moon is still beneath
> the surface of the Earth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_of_mass
I wish you guys would just stick with the science.
It's like watching little children arguing theoretical physics.
http://cosmic.lifeform.org
|
| | | | |
Date: 17 Aug 2006 13:10:22
From: Joe Strout
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
In article <ec2880$bji$2@leto.cc.emory.edu >,
lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote:
> >Charon and Pluto orbit a common point in between them.
> >
> >Brian
>
> But that's begging the question. Earth's moon does that too
No, Earth's moon orbits the Earth. AFAIK, Pluto/Charon is the only
example of o double planet in our solar system, by the definition that
their common center of mass is not within either body.
Best,
- Joe
|
| |
Date: 17 Aug 2006 21:07:27
From: James
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
"Thomas Lee Elifritz" <cosmic@lifeform.org > wrote in message
news:KVNEg.221$yB3.188@newsfe02.lga...
> I guess I’m ok with this. We get a fifth planet, representing asteroids,
> the Sun is the Origin (0), and everything else 10 and above is a pluton.
> Then there are the plutinos, and apparantly a wholelotta pluterinos.
>
> Jeez, there’s a lot of purple ice out there.
It's fortunate they consulted you first
|
| |
Date: 17 Aug 2006 16:25:22
From: Landy
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
Eric Chomko wrote:
> Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
> > I guess I'm ok with this. We get a fifth planet, representing asteroids,
> > the Sun is the Origin (0), and everything else 10 and above is a pluton.
> > Then there are the plutinos, and apparantly a wholelotta pluterinos.
> >
> > Jeez, there's a lot of purple ice out there.
>
> Which used to be purple rain until Prince lost his ability to make
> music and perform.
Um, can you lose something you never had in the first place?
cheers
Bill
|
| |
Date: 17 Aug 2006 10:17:48
From: Eric Chomko
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
Thomas Lee Elifritz wrote:
> I guess I'm ok with this. We get a fifth planet, representing asteroids,
> the Sun is the Origin (0), and everything else 10 and above is a pluton.
> Then there are the plutinos, and apparantly a wholelotta pluterinos.
>
> Jeez, there's a lot of purple ice out there.
Which used to be purple rain until Prince lost his ability to make
music and perform.
(Sorry I couldn't let that one go).
Eric
>
> http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=164
>
> http://cosmic.lifeform.org/?p=115
|
| |
Date: 18 Aug 2006 21:33:41
From: robert casey
Subject: Re: Ceres - The Fifth Planet From The Sun
|
>
> Jeez, there’s a lot of purple ice out there.
>
Better that than yellow snow.... :-)
|
|
