| |
Main
Date: 29 Aug 2006 17:55:35
From: Al
Subject: Question about the planet formerly known as Pluto
|
Fellow amateurs,
As a (frequently rank) amateur I'm hoping someone might advise me - what
should I now call Pluto please?
UB2006-001 ?
I never liked Pluto that much anyway. My best photo of it is only one pixel
across and I can't hardly make out any detail at all...
Al
|
|
| |
Date: 29 Aug 2006 09:20:58
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Question about the planet formerly known as Pluto
|
Al wrote:
> Fellow amateurs,
>
> As a (frequently rank) amateur I'm hoping someone might advise me - what
> should I now call Pluto please?
>
> UB2006-001 ?
Since it is now a dwarf planet I say we give all the dwarf planets
proper names. Personally, I like "Grumpy." Ceres could be "Dopey."
Perhaps Xena could be "Doc."
And if we run out of dwarf names there are always Reindeer. People tend
to get them mixed up anyhow. "Blitzen" anyone?
--
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: 29 Aug 2006 06:27:45
From: RMOLLISE
Subject: Re: Question about the planet formerly known as Pluto
|
Al wrote:
> Fellow amateurs,
>
> As a (frequently rank) amateur I'm hoping someone might advise me - what
> should I now call Pluto please?
"Pluto."
Peace,
Rod Mollise
Author of _Choosing and Using a Schmidt Cassegrain Telescope_
and
_The Urban Astronomer's Guide_
<http://skywatch.brainiac.com/astroland/index.htm >
Like SCTs and MCTs?
Check-out sct-user, the mailing list for CAT fanciers:
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sct-user >
|
| |
Date: 29 Aug 2006 11:13:10
From: Paul Schlyter
Subject: Re: Question about the planet formerly known as Pluto
|
In article <44f3f2eb$0$5111$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au >,
Al <null@null.com > wrote:
>Fellow amateurs,
>
>As a (frequently rank) amateur I'm hoping someone might advise me - what
>should I now call Pluto please?
>
>UB2006-001 ?
Nah -- it would be 1930DA, presuming that no asteroids were discovered
between 15 and 18 February 1930. But it's still named Pluto, so why not
go on calling it that?
Check out: http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/iau/info/OldDesDoc.html
for info about how provisional asteroid designations are created.
>I never liked Pluto that much anyway. My best photo of it is only one pixel
>across and I can't hardly make out any detail at all...
Ok, settle for 1930DA then.... :-)
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/
|
| |
Date: 29 Aug 2006 10:45:32
From: Per Erik Jorde
Subject: Re: Question about the planet formerly known as Pluto
|
"Al" <null@null.com > writes:
> Fellow amateurs,
>
> As a (frequently rank) amateur I'm hoping someone might advise me - what
> should I now call Pluto please?
>
> UB2006-001 ?
Why? Pluto will forwever remain Pluto, of course. Regardless of which
category it is classified into.
pej
--
Per Erik Jorde
|
| |
Date: 29 Aug 2006 22:01:01
From: Johnny Borborigmi
Subject: Re: Question about the planet formerly known as Pluto
|
On 2006-08-29 03:55:35 -0400, "Al" <null@null.com > said:
> Fellow amateurs,
>
> As a (frequently rank) amateur I'm hoping someone might advise me -
> what should I now call Pluto please?
>
> UB2006-001 ?
>
> I never liked Pluto that much anyway. My best photo of it is only one
> pixel across and I can't hardly make out any detail at all...
>
> Al
Call it Pluto. The name doesn't change.
|
| |
Date: 29 Aug 2006 12:43:37
From: Ernie Dunbar
Subject: Re: CASSIOPEIA A - THE COLORFUL AFTERMATH OF A VIOLENT STELLAR DEATH (STScI-PRC06-30-Heritage)
|
John Banister wrote:
> Any viewing info, such as coord, magnitude, etc.? Thanks.
>
> -John
I googled for "Cassiopeia A", and clicked "I'm feeling lucky", which
brought me here:
http://www.seds.org/~spider/spider/Vars/casA.html
My dad always said that there are no stupid questions. There are
however, questions easily answered by readily available references.
|
|
