Bye Bye Pluto?

[tabi]

This seems to be more scienific then anything but my question is:

What would happen if they did class them as planets?

It would not only redefine our heavens above and give all the space community new goals to shoot for but it will also redefine our knowledge of what planets show influence over our lives. We could have a "planet" for each of the zodiac defining them better to each individual sign and influence better especially for those signs that share a planet.

Not only is this a huge step in for the science field but as well as astrologist. I have to say that I am extremely interested in how this will come out.


....also how can we have planets since Galileo and no one has been able to give them a proper definition?

 

[tabbycat]

They can't take away Pluto's status as a planet! I mean, they haven't even found Mickey and Goofy yet!*

*with apologies - this is an Illuminatus joke!

 

[Minderwiz]

Well there is a system for sign rulership in traditional Astrology and it works well. The problem I foresee is that when you have perhaps 20 or 30 'planets' (including plutons and former asteroids) somebody is bound to try to create multiple rulerships without any systematic or sensible basis - though the admission of further Kuiper belt objects may reunite Goofy, Mickey and even Donald.

Astrology has two bases for rulership. The first is sign rulershiip based on the Sun and Moon at the centre (Leo/Cancer) and then pairs of signs (starting with Gemini and Virgo) that are further and further from Leo/Cancer ruled by planets in order (Mercury through to Saturn - which rules Aquarius and Capricorn)

The other basis is affininty with Saturn ruling such things as lead and death. This system has developed over a long period of time and it is generally accepted - if the new planets. These two types of rulership seem to be confused by some Astrologers.

I take the sign rulership system as a given (because it is systematic, has a clear logical base an works) Adding co-rulers to signs doesn't. I don't see any reason in principle why affinity rulerships can't be used for the new planets but settling these into a generally acceptable system seems an impossible task.

I'm not sure ignoring size is a sensible approach to defining 'a planet' but it's worth making one comment about the definition. Astrologers based much of their ideas and theories on 'light'. The Sun and Moon are referred to as 'the lights', planets were taken as light reflectors and the ideas of tranlation and collection of light are very important to Horary Astrology. The word 'aspect' comes from the Latin 'aspectus' meaning a glance. At the heart of Astrology is the idea that if you can't see it then it isn't a planet. Points such as the Ascendant or Descendant don't reflect light. They can receive it by aspect but they cannot transmit it by aspect. Whether you agree with this or think it old fashioned it does have system and logic.

If we have two or three dozen 'planets' we're not going to get system we're going to get a mess.

For the traditional Astrologer or the vedic Astrologer I don't think elevating Xena to being a planet will make any difference at all. They won't be used because they don't fit the system. Elsewhere though I can see lots and lots of learned articles in journals.

 

[Fulgour]

toodles to pluto

"Joy is not in Pluto, it is in us."

~Richard ( sort of ) Wagner

 

[tabi]

Personally I feel that it was bound to happen somewhere a long the line just given the advances in mordern technolgy. We always known that we couldn't fully define our solar system simply due to the fact we couldn't see it all.

As to what defines as a planet and what doesn't. I think they could be there for a very long time trying to decide just that basic concept.

Is or isn't Pluto a planet I think is going to become their major problem. Once they have answer to that one everything else should be easier to define.

Ya know it is nice to see the eggheads confused every now and then by the way.

 

[Grigori]

A news snippet was just on TV saying that Pluto and Xena have both been confirmed as a planet. And if I heard right, one of Pluto's moons status was upgraded also.

 

[Minderwiz]

That's right. The committee making the recommendations to the IAU conference has suggested a definition (mentioned earlier in the thread) that a planet:

- orbits a star
- is not a star itself
- and gravity has led to it being spherical in shape.

The problem is that (in theory) this could apply to a snowball

There's a little slight of hand in all this - Pluto is no longer a 'classical' planet it's not the first of a new kind of planet - a pluto. They haven't got the nerve to say it's not a planet, end of story. Rather they have had to create a new class of planet, so that they can still refer to it as a 'planet'.

 

[Skysteel]

God I hate snowballs.
-

There's a little slight of hand in all this - Pluto is no longer a 'classical' planet it's not the first of a new kind of planet - a pluto. They haven't got the nerve to say it's not a planet, end of story. Rather they have had to create a new class of planet, so that they can still refer to it as a 'planet'.

A new class of plutons (which has some interesting mythological links). Also, planets have always been divided into sub-groups (terrestials, jovians, superiors, gas-giants, etc.).

 

[rainwolf]

I dont really think "demoting" the planet is by classification. I think it is just how we are going to categorize it. If something small like this falsifies a lot of information, I don't think we had a good system in the first place.

Whether it is called a planet or a "pluton" *holds back laughter*, does not affect my interpretation of it.

What are they smoking when they name these things, and where can I get some?

 

[Minderwiz]

Whether it is called a planet or a "pluton" *holds back laughter*, does not affect my interpretation of it.

What are they smoking when they name these things, and where can I get some?

And they have the gall to say that Astrology is wishy washy !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It might be best if Astrologers (who know what a planet is and gave them a perfectly servicable definition) left Astronomers to contemplate their collective navels and just ignored them