It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
a reply to: Xcathdra
I really wish they'd make up their minds. When I was a kid, we were taught that Pluto was discovered because they were looking for something bigger. Pluto wasn't large enough to account for the gravitational effects observed.
In 1992, Myles Standish used data from Voyager 2's flyby of Neptune in 1989, which had revised the estimates of Neptune's mass downward by 0.5%—an amount comparable to the mass of Mars—to recalculate its gravitational effect on Uranus. With the new figures added in, the discrepancies, and with them the need for a Planet X, vanished.
Pluto should be a planet, dammit!
originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: NewzNose
Pluto should be a planet, dammit!
I don't understand this 'dwarf planet' nonsense-it's either a planet or it's not. To paraphrase Sideshow Bob "no one wins a Nobel prize for attempted chemistry."
If classifications were clear and concise, there would be dozens of planets in our solar system.