The other day I saw a piece ont he web about new photos of the solar system's smallest planet, and they were pictures of Mercury.
While I am a staunch supported of the Astronomical Union, and have gone along with Pluto's demotion to a minor planet a few years ago, this piece (from APOD I believe), kind of bothered me.
What the AU (clever name - abbreviates to the same as Astronomical Units lol) really did in its demotion of Pluto was create 2 classifications of planets, when previously there was only one. So, the smallest planet should still be Pluto, and the smallest major planet should be Mercury. Incidentally, the largest minor planet should also be Pluto...
Anyhow, If the AU has bestowed upon itself the lofty ambition of cataloguing the heavens, and occasionally re-organizing it, shouldn't they demonstrate a certain diligence in ensuring that this kinf of re-segmentation is properly branded and well communicated? Otherwise they are really just sowing confusion rather than bringing clarity to their field.
Some steps they could take to execute:
- Ensure the terms "major planet" and "minor planet" are googleable in terms of updated search engine criteria, globally (unless their authority does not extend to every nation of this planet, in which case the move would be extraterritorial in nature).
- Burn all astronomy books written before their "Pluto Judgement" if I can be permitted to cap & quote the term.
- Organize anti-heresy squads to stamp out the notion that Pluto can still be counted among the major planets.
- Bring the relevance of this move to the people by selling them on the benefits of taking Pluto down a notch and creating a whole new class of planets.
All to say, Pluto does not seem to getting a fair shake, and by liberally thoring the term planet around, the entire solar system is suffering and each planet's individual contribution and message is being diluted.
Am I alone here? *crickets*