Quote:
Originally Posted by Astro_Bot
It's Monday morning, Ron. I don't think anyone was expecting this thread to be taken too seriously. 
Malcolm already posted the IAU's new "planetary criteria", but this article explains Pluto's demotion in straightforward terms. Size didn't count against Pluto in the final analysis (it has enough mass to achieve hydrostatic equilibrium), but rather the third planetary criteria of "cleared the neighbourhood" around its orbit was the sticking point.
An object meeting the first two criteria but not the third is a "dwarf planet". |
I was just reading the defination of a planet.
here
I think they should not have included the third one,as there is no no planet that has done that,even Jupiter is not exempt.
I think Size did count, as that is one of the reasons Mike Brown even says so.
There is so much more as well.
Cheers
