A Group of scientist of the NASA want make a proposal for changes in the definition of planet at the Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, here you may read all the story :
https://tribune.com....d-solar-system/
Now, regardless the fact that Pluto will return to be a planet if the new definition will be accepted ( if this will happend i will open anothe discussion only on Pluto ), i will like know your opinion on this : What is a planet ?
are you agree whit the proposal of the new definition :
" a planet is a substellar mass body that has never undergone nuclear fusion and that has sufficient self-gravitation to assume a spheroidal shape adequately descibed by a triaxial ellipsoid, regardless of its orbit parameters "
or you like more the actual one :
"a planet is a celestial body which :
1 - is in orbit around the Sun
2 - has sufficient mass to assume hydorstatic equilibium ( is nearly round shape )
3 - has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit."
or you think that must be something of different ?
For me, is fine the actual one except the 3° point, even the Earth don't fully clear the "neighbourhood", i will like delete the 3° point and modify the 1 whit : "is in orbit around the Sun and is not the satellite of another planet"
Edited by Dark Ice Dragon, 21 March 2017 - 04:26 PM.