Minderwiz
Astronomers are holding a conference today which may well result in a definition of what a planet is (they haven't got one at the moment).
The main reason for this is the recent discovery of 'Xena' or to give it it's current designation, 2003 UB313. This has been discussed here before:
http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=45569&highlight=Xena
As Xena is some 70 miles longer in diameter than Pluto, then if Pluto is a planet Xena should be one. However despite initial claims when it was discovered, Pluto is actually much smaller than the other planerts - indeed it is smaller than the Moon. Astronomers have shied away from downgrading it in the past but are now faced with the dilemma of classifying Xena. If Xena is not a planet then Pluto must be downgraded. There are also known to be a number of Kuyper belt objects that need a clear classification and as Pluto is really one of these bodies, this gives the opportunity to have a clear classification of bodies orbiting the Sun.
There is an interesting article at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,,1844051,00.html
Two Interesting comments in the article are that Astrologers are likely to be most upset if Pluto loses its status as a planet. I would guess that actually most of the world's Astrologers don't use it and never used it - the minority of users being Western proponents of a 'psychological approach' to Astrology.
The second comment is that Astronomers are more likely to keep Pluto as a planet and declare Xena the 10th planet. So much for their much vaunted claim that Astronomy is based on hard science rather than the 'sentimental anthropomorphic views of Astrologers.'
Sky News reports that the Astronomer's conference may also deal with the issue of Ceres, which also has some support for some form of planetary status.
Will it affect Astrological practice - my view would be that it will not, Vedic and Traditional Astrologers will continue to ignore the outer planets (however defined) and Asteroids, Asteroid users will continue to use Ceres and feel that their approach now has scientific backing, and Psycholigcal Astrologers will feel that this whole issue is clearly a Plutonian moment, a destruction of current othrodoxies - proving plutos value as a planet.
I'd be inetersted in the views of other members
The main reason for this is the recent discovery of 'Xena' or to give it it's current designation, 2003 UB313. This has been discussed here before:
http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=45569&highlight=Xena
As Xena is some 70 miles longer in diameter than Pluto, then if Pluto is a planet Xena should be one. However despite initial claims when it was discovered, Pluto is actually much smaller than the other planerts - indeed it is smaller than the Moon. Astronomers have shied away from downgrading it in the past but are now faced with the dilemma of classifying Xena. If Xena is not a planet then Pluto must be downgraded. There are also known to be a number of Kuyper belt objects that need a clear classification and as Pluto is really one of these bodies, this gives the opportunity to have a clear classification of bodies orbiting the Sun.
There is an interesting article at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,,1844051,00.html
Two Interesting comments in the article are that Astrologers are likely to be most upset if Pluto loses its status as a planet. I would guess that actually most of the world's Astrologers don't use it and never used it - the minority of users being Western proponents of a 'psychological approach' to Astrology.
The second comment is that Astronomers are more likely to keep Pluto as a planet and declare Xena the 10th planet. So much for their much vaunted claim that Astronomy is based on hard science rather than the 'sentimental anthropomorphic views of Astrologers.'
Sky News reports that the Astronomer's conference may also deal with the issue of Ceres, which also has some support for some form of planetary status.
Will it affect Astrological practice - my view would be that it will not, Vedic and Traditional Astrologers will continue to ignore the outer planets (however defined) and Asteroids, Asteroid users will continue to use Ceres and feel that their approach now has scientific backing, and Psycholigcal Astrologers will feel that this whole issue is clearly a Plutonian moment, a destruction of current othrodoxies - proving plutos value as a planet.
I'd be inetersted in the views of other members
K
