Study suggests Pluto should be reclassified as a planet again

More than a decade after Pluto lost its planet status, researchers from a new study say it should be reclassified as a planet. How did Pluto lose its planet status in the first place?

Status of the planet Pluto

In August 2006, Pluto lost its global status after the International Astronomical Union (IAU) established that for a planet to be classified as such, it must have the ability to clear the neighborhood around its orbit. as the greatest gravitational force in the region. In this case, Pluto shares its orbit with various gases and objects in the Kuiper Belt and is influenced by the severity of Neptune.

Now, more than a decade after Pluto was deprived of its planet status, researchers of a new study published in the journal Icarus claim that the very classification that caused the decommissioning of Pluto is in fact not supported by the research literature.

Evidently, after reviewing the literature of the last 200 years, researchers have discovered that a single 1802 publication requiring orbital grading for a planet to rank as such was based on reasoning unfounded.

"Sloppy" definition

According to the main study by Philip Metzger of the Florida Space Institute, the definition of IAU is based on a concept that is not used in research and that even the moons of Saturn and Jupiter have been called planets. In addition, he describes the definition as "neglected", indicating that if taken literally, then no planet would be classified as such because no planet removes its orbit.

"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, "said Metzger.

Study co-author Kirby Runyon of Johns Hopkins University describes the IAU definition as an error and a "false historical statement" because the 2006 IAU definition does not indicate that the

What is a planet?

It was in the early 1950s that Gerard Kuiper's study differentiated planets from other celestial bodies such as asteroids according to their formation, but this is no longer a determining factor in the classification of planets.

According to the classification of the AIU, a planet must be orbiting a sun, have enough mass to have an almost round shape, not be a satellite and have cleaned the neighborhood in its orbit. Dwarf planets have almost all the qualifications, apart from not erasing their orbits.

The researchers say that in the definition of planets, they would be better based on intrinsic properties rather than on changing properties such as its orbit. One of the recommendations was to classify the planets according to their gravity allows them to become spherical and active geology is initiated in the body. For example, Pluto has multiple atmospheres, evidence of moons and ancient lakes, organic compounds and an underground ocean.

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