Planet Gold Dwarf? Pluto lost planetary status incorrectly, study suggests

We all love Pluto. The cute dwarf planet sits at the edge of our solar system, attracting attention with its unique properties, including a massive surface feature resembling a heart. It has long been the subject of scientific studies, but years of observations have also led to a major conflict, one related to its classification as a dwarf.

If you are 90's or before, you must remember Pluto as the ninth planet in our solar neighborhood. However, the International Astronomical Union (IAU), which is the main body for the characterization and classification of space objects, withdrew this designation in 2006, leaving Pluto in the category of dwarves.

The decision was immediately rejected by many people and, after more than a decade, a group of astronomers and planetary scientists showed that the classification was based on an invalid criterion.

A study showed that Pluto was incorrectly classified as a dwarf planet. In the photo, a true color view of Pluto created from four images taken by NASA's New Horizons long-range reconnaissance imager. Photo: NASA / Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory / Southwestern Research Institute

The criterion in question, as the researchers have described, is the ability to "clean the neighborhood". According to the IAU definition, a body must have gravitational dominance and clear the neighborhood around its orbit to be classified as a planet.

The gravitational force of Pluto was not so strong. It was influenced by the attraction of the neighboring planet Neptune and contained objects from the Kuiper belt and frozen gases in its orbit, which pushed the world body to classify it as a dwarf.

However, after reviewing more than two centuries of global literature, researchers at the University of Central Florida concluded that the IAU standard for distinguishing planets from other celestial objects was not the ideal way to judge Pluto.

The group reviewed much of the research and discovered that only one publication was following the "orbit clearance" approach to classifying the planets. This methodology was adopted in 1802 and has been refuted by many. In other words, the definition of IAU of a planet comes from a concept that no one uses for the moment.

"It's a neglected definition," said Philip Metzger, the principal author of the work, in a statement. "They did not say what they meant by cleaning their orbit, if you take that literally, then there are no planets, because no planet is in orbit."

Apart from that, the researchers also noted that scientists used the term planet to also describe moons, such as Europa of Jupiter or Titan of Saturn.

"We now have a list of more than 100 recent examples of planetary scientists using the word planet in a way that violates the definition of IAU, but they do so because it is useful on the planet. functional plan, "added Metzger.

The researchers added that bodies, especially those like Pluto, should be classified based on their natural properties rather than features likely to change – like their orbit.

"The dynamics are not constant, they change constantly," added Metzger. "So, they are not the basic description of a body, they are only the occupation of a body at a present time."

The correct way to classify, as they have suggested, could be based on the size element, as if a body is large enough to allow its gravity to make it spherical and to trigger active geological processes such as underground oceans , organic compounds, etc. multilayer atmosphere – we see on Pluto.

"It's more vibrant and alive than Mars," Metzger concluded. "The only planet that has a more complex geology is the Earth."

The study entitled "The reclassification of planetary asteroids to non-planets" was published August 29 in the journal Icarus.