Pluto should be reclassified as a planet, say experts

Washington, 9 September According to scientists, Pluto has wrongly lost its planet status, suggesting that the frozen dwarf should be reclassified as a planetary body.

In 2006, the International Astronomical Union (IAU), a global group of astronomical experts, defined a planet that demanded that it "clear" its orbit or, in other words, be the greatest force gravitational of its orbit.

Since Neptune's gravity influences his neighboring planet Pluto and Pluto shares his orbit with frozen gases and objects in the Kuiper belt, it meant that Pluto was off the planet.

However, in a study published in the journal Icarus, researchers reported that this standard of classification of planets was not taken into account in the scientific literature.

They reviewed the scientific literature of the last 200 years and found a single publication – from 1802 – that used the requirement of putting it into orbit to categorize the planets and relied on unfounded reasoning.

Moons such as Saturn's Titan and Jupiter's Europa have been commonly called planets by planetary scientists since the time of Galileo.

"The definition of AIU would say that the fundamental object of planetary science, the planet, is supposed to be defined on the basis of a concept that no one uses in its research", said Philip Metzger, planet specialist at the University of Central Florida. United States.

"And that would leave out the second most complex and interesting planet in our solar system," Metzger said.

"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, "he said.

The planetary scientist stated that the literature review showed that the true division between planets and other celestial bodies, such as asteroids, occurred in the early 1950s, when Gerard Kuiper published a distinguishing article.

However, even this reason is no longer considered a determining factor if a celestial body is a planet, Metzger said.

The definition of IAU was flawed since the literature review showed that the orbit clearance is not a standard used to distinguish asteroids from planets, as stated by the I & # 39; IAU during the development of the definition of the planets 2006, said Kirby Runyon in the United States.

"We have shown that it was a false historical statement, so it is misleading to apply the same reasoning to Pluto," Runyon said.

Metzger said that the definition of a planet should be based on its intrinsic properties, rather than those that can change, such as the dynamics of the orbit of a planet.

Instead, Metzger recommends classifying a planet according to its size sufficient for its gravity to become spherical.

Pluto, for example, has an underground ocean, a multilayered atmosphere, organic compounds, evidence of ancient lakes and multiple moons, he said.

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