Pluto belongs to a new category : plutoids

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter pixel01
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pluto
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the classification of Pluto as a "plutoid" following its reclassification from a planet to a dwarf planet. Participants explore the implications of this new terminology, its origins, and the cultural associations tied to the name "Pluto." The conversation touches on historical context, nomenclature, and the emotional responses to Pluto's changing status in the astronomical community.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express that the new classification as "plutoids" reflects a reluctance to accept Pluto's status as a non-planet.
  • There is a repeated inquiry about the initial proposal to use the term "plutons" instead of "plutoids," with some participants finding "plutoids" less appealing.
  • One participant notes that the suffix "-oid" in "plutoid" follows standard Latin nomenclature, suggesting it denotes likeness, similar to "planetoid" and "asteroid."
  • Another participant reflects on the historical context of the name "Pluto," mentioning its origins linked to an English schoolgirl and the influence of Disney, while questioning the significance of retaining the "pluto-" prefix.
  • Some participants discuss the implications of naming conventions, with one suggesting that "plutoids" serves to appease those who are attached to Pluto's legacy.
  • There is a humorous exchange regarding alternative names, such as "erisoid" or "hermeoids," and their potential cultural connotations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit a range of opinions regarding the appropriateness and implications of the term "plutoid." There is no consensus on whether this new classification is satisfactory or if it adequately reflects Pluto's status, indicating ongoing debate and differing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes references to historical naming conventions and cultural associations, which may influence participants' views on the classification of Pluto and its implications for similar celestial bodies. Some assumptions about the emotional weight of naming and the historical context of Pluto's discovery are present but not fully explored.

Astronomy news on Phys.org
Interesting, although, I feel the this is caused by people who can't let go of the fact that it is no longer considered a "planet".

oh, and fyi,
remove the " #comments " from your link so it goes to the top of the page.
 
What happened to the plan to call them "plutons"?

Plutoids make them sound like other less appealing things that end in "-oid".
 
LowlyPion said:
What happened to the plan to call them "plutons"?

Plutoids make them sound like other less appealing things that end in "-oid".

They're just following the standard Latin nomenclature, where -oid means 'the likeness of'. The same as planetoid (likeness a planet) and asteroid (likeness a star). IMO, it's a very distinguishing position Pluto is now in, it is the very object for which all future 'plutoids' will be named after.
 
Given the origin and all I could see "planetoids" in the spirit of scaling up from asteroids since they are "like" planets, it's just that I recall at one point earlier in their discussion they had referred to them as "plutons".

Not that it really matters all that much to me ... What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

But considering the origin of the name - suggested by an English schoolgirl I understand - with possibly Disney and not Roman mythology on the brain - and meshing apparently with the initials of Percival Lowell - Lowell observatory and all that tracked it down and adopted it - I just think it seems an odd nod to history to preserve the "pluto-ness" of it at all now it's decided it doesn't meet the new concocted definition.

Ultimately I suppose calling them plutoids now is at least a way of tossing the Pluto-purists a bone - so to speak.
 
Seems I got the order of things a bit off between Disney and Pluto the planet now just the archetype of a class called plutoids.

This article seems to address the issue quite directly:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4596246.stm

Interestingly Pluto the non-anthropomorphised Disney dog - as opposed to Goofy - the lower IQ dog that wears clothes - though he too first appeared in 1930 too didn't acquired his name until 1931 - the year after Venetia Phair made her suggestion in tribute to Pluto, Roman God of the underworld.

The origin of Disney Pluto from Wikipedia (fwtw):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto_(Disney )
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pluto is still lucky that IAU has chosen the term "plutoid" instead of "erisoid"
 
Well if you want to start talking about lucky let us be thankful that Hermes (nee Mercury by the Romans) wasn't available and not chosen.

I'm not sure the world would be happy with calling these plutoids by the name of "hermeoids". (I can sense a difficult association with the "preparation" of the Hubble constant "H".)

Though oddly Hermes - the Greek god of "boundaries" - might well have been a really good choice given the boundary nature of Pluto and its plutoid cousins drifting about out there.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
31K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K