TheBlackCat

This may take a while to explain, so bear with me.

I should probably say first that I have no problem with conservatives per se. I do, however, have a problem with people on either side of the political spectrum that take their political beliefs, or any belief for that matter, so far that they completely lose touch with reality.

Conservative blogger Mike Janitch seems to have done that.

For those of you who have been living under a rock for the last month or so, the International Astronomical Union, or IAU, recently came up with a definition for planet. Using this definition, Pluto does not qualify as a planet. That leaves us with 8 planets in our solar system and various "minor planets" like Pluto and Ceres (an asteroid). This has been a serious debate since the discovery of Kuiper Belt Objects (KBO's) some years ago. It is pretty much impossible to make an objective definition of planet that includes Pluto but does not include KBO's, leading to a lot of debate amongsts scientists and everyday people about what is and is not a planet. The IAU decided Pluto did not fit the bill, and there was a huge outcry from scientists and laypeople about it. Of course, if they had declared that at least the larger KBO's were planets than there would have been a similar outcry. They really had no other choices.

Anyway, this is all sort of tengentially related to the real issue. Last week, with much less fanfare, the IAU decided on a final name for the KBO so far nicknamed "Xena", after the TV character played by Lucy Lawless (remember this name, it is important later). "Xena" is the largest known KBO, larger even than Pluto, and has a large moon much like Pluto does. Its discovery was one of the driving forces behind the IAU's decision to remove Pluto's status as a planet, since obviously they couldn't have Pluto as a planet yet deny a larger object in the same area the same status.

So, anyway, the IAU decided to go with the name recommended by the discoverer, "Eris". According to Greek mythology:
Wow, sounds pretty fitting for an object that directly led to one of the largest debates in planetary science in recent memory, huh? The Trojan war example is most fitting since what was seen in the astronomical community is probably the closest thing you see to war between scientists outside of the Soviet Union (another topic entirely). Especially considering it brought many everyday people into the fray, something fairly rare in the field. There have even been resolutions passed by governments condemning the move.

Eris's moon was named Dysnomia, after the Greek goddess of lawlessness. Remember the name of the actress who played Xena? Lucy lawless. Even astronomers can have a sense of humor sometimes.

Mike Janitch isn't laughing. He sees some much more in this decision, something sinister. He is convinced it is a liberal conspiracy by the astronomical community to undermine the US war effory.

No, I am not kidding. From http://www.mikejanitch.com/blog/_arc...6.htmlhis blog:

(emphasis added)

Seriously, don't these people have enough enemies without having to make them up?

Yeah, of course he picked the name before Pluto was named (the name was only submitted 9 days before it was officially approved). The implications an object like this would have towards Pluto's status as a planet had been known and extensively discussed for many years before it was actually discovered. Everybody knew something like this would be found and what the result would be.

Phil Plait, an astronomer and pro-science blogger, actually talked to the discoverer personally. Apparently this is just completely wrong, there was no political motive in the name at all.

Mike got a lot of flack for this in his comments. His response was the obvious one: delete every comment that disagreed with his position, in other words all of them, then disable commenting on the topic so no one can say anything further.

He then tried to backpedal a little, saying that whatever the reason the names were inappropriate. Like anyone is going to care why the names were picked 10 years from now. How many people know that the name "Pluto" is probably a reference to Percival Lowell? No one will care.

He goes on with the attempted backpedalling:
Ooh, those nefarious astronomers. What are they really doing with all those telescopes

He obviously doesn't understand how war is played out in the scientific arena. It isn't done with weapons, unless you happen to live in the Soviet Union. It is done with words.

Nor does he understand scientific strife for that matter, apparently.

No, Xena was Lawless (haha, I did a funny)

I take it he is being sarcastic here.
Why? He has no evidence to back this up other than his own, apparently extreme, paranoia. Nothing. Zip. Zilch.

He also seems to be forgetting this decision was made by the International Astronomical Union. There is always "war, strife, and lawlessness" in the world. It just doesn't usually overtly affect Americans so few Americans care. But to think that the IAU is that obsessed with US politics but completely unconcerend witha any other politics in any other country at any other point in its history is frankly absurd.

I should point out that these puns and references to current events are not all that serious. There are rules regarding how objects are named under the IAU, and these names met those rules. Many names are already taken, so they had a limited stock of names to choose from. So these ones were on the list. It is not probably so much that these names were picked soley for their significance, but they fit the object and fit the rules, it is not like they should specifically avoid them because they may have some connection to current events in the astronomy community. So it would probably be better to think of it as though it is an amusing coincidence that two of the appropriate names happen to also have some connection to events in the astronomy community, so the people making the names did not go out of their way to avoid using them. They are just as aware as everyone else that these names will be used for a long time (knock on wood), once any possible reason behind the choice of the name is forgotten you will be left with two objects named after dieties from classical mythology, just like most of the other large objects in the solar system. No one would give the names a second thought, just like no one gives the name Pluto a second thought despite its possible significance to those who named it.

Anyway, it just drives me nuts how far people who go to try to twist some innocuous scientific squabble into an evil scientific consipiracy to destroy the country.

__________________
[color=#000000]There is always an easy solution to every human problem—neat, plausible and wrong.[/color]
-H. L. Mencken

dj_stick

Thread Moved

I feel this thread is more suited for the PD forum. You've made some good points there, I'd like to hear other opinions on this.

__________________

Zelig

To be honest, he just seems like a crazy, not worth worrying about.

__________________
--

SFOSOK

can they prove the orbits of these so-called KBO's?

__________________
*Warning* - Explicit Content Preceeding



METAL!!

TheBlackCat

What do you mean "prove"? You can't really "prove" something in science. However they can see them move relative to the stars behind them, and by comparing where they are at various points in time they can determine both their trajectory and their velocity. The physics that determine how such objects behave is well-established at this point, it is simply an issue of getting enough measurements that are precise enough over a long enough period of time to get precise results. Luckily Eris had been picked up over the last 17 years by various telescopes, it is just that everyone missed it because it is so far away and thus moving so slowly. This helped them get much more precise results.

Here is an article describing the technique used to determine Eris's orbit.

Here is a time-lapse video showing Eris moving relative to a backdrop of stationary stars. Can you find it?

__________________
[color=#000000]There is always an easy solution to every human problem—neat, plausible and wrong.[/color]
-H. L. Mencken