logoalt Hacker News

hn_submityesterday at 7:28 PM3 repliesview on HN

We could simply define Pluto as the edge of our Solar System and everything beyond its orbit a Kuiper Belt Object. There's nothing wrong with that.

Why bother coming up with a pseudo-scientific requirements list for planets when these don't work for a large number of cases.


Replies

bryanlarsenyesterday at 7:34 PM

That would include Ceres, Quaoar and Orcus as planets.

It's really hard to come up with a definition of a planet that includes Pluto but doesn't include Orcus. Orcus is very close to a mirror of Pluto that is 120 degrees out of phase. Even in name: Orcus is the Roman name for the Greek god Pluto.

show 1 reply
autoexecyesterday at 10:16 PM

> We could simply define Pluto as the edge of our Solar System and everything beyond its orbit a Kuiper Belt Object. There's nothing wrong with that.

There is because Pluto is inside the Kuiper Belt and just as much a part of it as all the other "planets" in there. There's nothing wrong with defining our solar system as having 8 planets plus a bunch of other stuff.

vova_hn2yesterday at 7:51 PM

> We could simply define Pluto as the edge of our Solar System and everything beyond its orbit a Kuiper Belt Object.

A Kuiper Belt Object not being a part of Solar System doesn't make any sense. A star system is the star + all objects that orbit it. Why would you arbitrarily exclude some objects that orbit the Sun?