We have a new planet - Ceres

SpaceBull · 2006-08-16 17:02:37

Will it have a great impact on space exploration that Ceres will now be considered a planet instead of an asteroid?

I think it will!

Previous space exploration has been focused on Mars and Venus, but I believe this might change when Ceres is redefined as a planet. This little ice-covered world the size of Texas should certainly be explored with suitable equipment. Maybe we could even send manned missions there one day - the escape velocity is not exactly very high, and the frozen surface water makes it suitable for settlement.

Commodore · 2006-08-16 19:05:34

It definately adds a wrinkle.

It requires a combination of the lunar landing technology and surface ops, with the Mars transit technology. And since we basically have to do things in that order, it almost makes it a juicier target than Mars. Literally.

If we can harvest even a small amount of rocket fuel on the moon, that same technology can reap a massive crop on Ceres. And if we can transport it across interplanetary space, it with have an astronomical impact on space travel.

Kinda makes you wonder why it wasn't taken seriously before. It could really get the ball rolling.

SpaceNut · 2006-08-16 21:00:13

Then when we are done with all of the exploring we can tale time to try and write it all down into the next generations text books.

Now just how many planets are there, dwarf, gas giant.... and the list may grow beyound those.

But yes ceres is tempting....

dicktice · 2006-08-21 10:18:58

Ceres Direct?

RedStreak · 2006-08-21 16:21:48

Keep in mind they're still debating. They're simply outlined the most basic definition of a planet - i.e. something big and round. There's bound to be devils in the details.

Still I advocate visiting Ceres. It's obviously the biggest thing between Mars and Jupiter, its likely a prime example of the bodies that existed in the solar system during planetary formation, and it likely is a world unto itself...which may prove it worthy of the planet title.

RobertDyck · 2006-08-21 17:10:04

Last Friday, at our monthly Mars Society meeting, one member who is also president of the local chapter of the astronomy society announced this. He said we now have 12 planets including Cerers. The rule is it must have enough gravity to squish it into a sphere, and orbit a star. Our moon orbits a planet, not a star, so Luna isn't a planet. However, by my count that makes 13, not 12: the 9 we've known since grade school plus Ceres in the main asteroid belt, Quaoar and Xena in the Kuiper belt, and Sedna is so far out some people think it's an Oort cloud object. That adds up to 13. When I check Wikipedia I see they found a couple more Kuiper belt objects: 2005 FY9, and 2003 EL61. The latter is oval, but the former is spherical so that makes 14 planets.

By the way, the working code name for 2003 EL61 is "Santa", and the code name for 2005 FY9 is "Easterbunny". The catalogue designation for Xena is 2003 UB313; some astronomers want to claim the name "Xena" is also a working code name until they come up with a real name, but the guy who discovered it called it Xena. The tradition is the guy who finds a celestial object gets to name it, but many astronomers respond "You are NOT calling it THAT!" They could have claimed it was named after a Greek goddess, not a TV show character, but the Greek name is spelled Xenia. To make matters worse, they found a small rock orbitting Xena, which has been named Gabrielle, the TV character's sidekick. That settles it, it's named after a TV character. There's no way the science snobs will accept the name now.

Martin_Tristar · 2006-08-22 01:38:56

By the way, the International Conference also discussed another 12 objects that over time could become official planets on the list. Its also seems that we have hundreds of moons of the current planets.

We will have alot of exploring to do, but I hope this doesn't change the focus of current space programs from the Moon and certainly Mars.

RobS · 2006-08-22 16:04:47

Ceres should be visited by quite a few unmanned space probes; it represents a very large, only partially differentiated chondritic object, so it will tell us something about the stuff forming the solar system. It appears to be very wet, also, so there may be some very interesting chemical process occurring inside it, especially if it was hot in the past. The surface spectra appear to indicate the presence of salts and oxides, so the water has altered ("weathered"?) the interior.

Humans will visit when the return can justify the danger. That will depend on how quicky the danger (and cost) decrease and whether the unmanned vehicles find enough interesting data to warrant humans. The human-requiring project I envision: a truly deep drilling project to reach the asteroid's core, some 500 kilometers below the surface. That will require a lot of technological developments, almost certainly will require some humans present, and could tell us an immense amount about the evolution of Ceres, which could tell us something about the asteroid belt and the early solar system. I doubt Ceres' water or its central location in the asteroid belt are enough to warrant a staffed facility.

-- RobS

Commodore · 2006-08-24 19:13:59

Oh well, that was fun while it lasted.

Ceres would have would have made a great planet, and drawn attention to everything else in its neck of the woods.

GCNRevenger · 2006-08-24 19:17:58

And then there were eight

SpaceNut · 2006-08-24 20:30:54

But we will have many Drawfs to fill the void

With some of the definitions that they were being approved by them even Earth could have been demoted.

RedStreak · 2006-08-24 20:43:21

I don't think 'dwarf' is an appropriate name - people will still say 'planet'.

A whole new name should be created, something like planetoid would be perfect for instance - it suggests it is both planet-like and yet with characteristics like that of an asteroid. Isn't that what Pluto, Xena, and even Ceres all have in common and yet each is still a unique world?

Astronomers are notorious uncreative...such as that 'Pluton' remark that geologists had to point out was already one of their terms.

Josh Cryer · 2006-08-24 21:18:26

I wanted Ceres to be a planet, but I knew that if it was a planet, than many objects out there would be planets. So I'm happy with this new definition.

Commodore · 2006-08-24 22:39:09

I don't think 'dwarf' is an appropriate name - people will still say 'planet'.
A whole new name should be created, something like planetoid would be perfect for instance - it suggests it is both planet-like and yet with characteristics like that of an asteroid. Isn't that what Pluto, Xena, and even Ceres all have in common and yet each is still a unique world?
Astronomers are notorious uncreative...such as that 'Pluton' remark that geologists had to point out was already one of their terms.

In such a PC society, you can bet the lawyers will be all over this. We'll have to call them "Little People Planets".

They wanted to imply size, they could have solved the whole thing by setting a diameter requirement to be a planet. 750km for example.

idiom · 2006-08-24 23:09:18

Thats so arbitrary though

I liked the early idea, I dont mind having fifty planets, the more the merrier.

Commodore · 2006-08-25 21:32:26

No more arbitrary than saying a planet must destroy, capture, or kick out every other object in its neighborhood. And its more consistant to say a planet is a dwarf because its smaller than X than basing it on whats around it. No planet meets that standard.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2006-08-16 17:02:37

Re: We have a new planet - Ceres

#2 2006-08-16 19:05:34

Re: We have a new planet - Ceres

#3 2006-08-16 21:00:13

Re: We have a new planet - Ceres

#4 2006-08-21 10:18:58

Re: We have a new planet - Ceres

#5 2006-08-21 16:21:48

Re: We have a new planet - Ceres

#6 2006-08-21 17:10:04

Re: We have a new planet - Ceres

#7 2006-08-22 01:38:56

Re: We have a new planet - Ceres

#8 2006-08-22 16:04:47

Re: We have a new planet - Ceres

#9 2006-08-24 19:13:59

Re: We have a new planet - Ceres

#10 2006-08-24 19:17:58

Re: We have a new planet - Ceres

#11 2006-08-24 20:30:54

Re: We have a new planet - Ceres

#12 2006-08-24 20:43:21

Re: We have a new planet - Ceres

#13 2006-08-24 21:18:26

Re: We have a new planet - Ceres

#14 2006-08-24 22:39:09

Re: We have a new planet - Ceres

#15 2006-08-24 23:09:18

Re: We have a new planet - Ceres

#16 2006-08-25 21:32:26

Re: We have a new planet - Ceres

Board footer