.jpg)
.jpg)
The arrowed 14th magnitude dot in the first image is Pluto. Pluto looks like a rather dim star, but that speck really is the planet. Compare the Digital Sky Survey II image obtained from Wikisky.org. I also have carefully compared my image with the June Sky & Telescope chart that records stars down to 14th magnitude. Pluto is exactly where both that chart and Wikisky.org place it. This observation completes all nine (former) planets!
8 comments:
Pluto is not a "former planet." Only four percent of the IAU voted on the controversial demotion, and most are not planetary scientists. Their decision was immediately opposed in a formal petition by hundreds of professional astronomers led by Dr. Alan Stern, Principal Investigator of NASA’s New Horizons mission to Pluto. One reason the IAU definition makes no sense is it says dwarf planets are not planets at all! That is like saying a grizzly bear is not a bear, and it is inconsistent with the use of the term “dwarf” in astronomy, where dwarf stars are still stars, and dwarf galaxies are still galaxies. Also, the IAU definition classifies objects solely by where they are while ignoring what they are. If Earth were in Pluto’s orbit, according to the IAU definition, it would not be a planet either. A definition that takes the same object and makes it a planet in one location and not a planet in another is essentially useless. Pluto is a planet because it is spherical, meaning it is large enough to be pulled into a round shape by its own gravity--a state known as hydrostatic equilibrium and characteristic of planets, not of shapeless asteroids held together by chemical bonds. These reasons are why many astronomers, lay people, and educators are either ignoring the demotion entirely or working to get it overturned. I am a writer and amateur astronomer and proud to be one of these people. You can read more about why Pluto is a planet and worldwide efforts to overturn the demotion on my Pluto Blog at http://laurele.livejournal.com
"Nine (former) planets" was my phrase. So do you suppose I was also suggesting that Jupiter is a former planet? Whether one supports the IAU or not, there are no longer nine planets. Shame on you for misinterpreting my language in order to justify using my blog for your advocacy.
I honestly do not care what we call Pluto, Eris, Ceres, or any of them. But I am happy to have completed this observation. I will go looking for Eris and Ceres next. I was just as happy to find Vesta and Morovisia a while back.
If we use the criterion of hydrostatic equilibrium, our solar system has at least 13 planets and likely many more.
Many more indeed. Eris and Haumea are probably within range of my smallish equipment, and of course all such objects within the orbit of Jupiter are. It's a good time to be looking.
Congratulations on seeing all these wonderful objects! In central NJ where I live, there is way too much light pollution to see the small, faraway objects, even with the 24-inch and 10-inch telescopes at my astronomy club's observatory. There are still dark sky sites in the state, but then we have the other problem--constant clouds and rain, especially on weekends when observatories are open.
Awesome! That is so cool! Congratulations!
Thanks, Rory. It's pretty exciting, really. I figured I'd have to wait for a larger scope and a darker sky. What a surprise to see it so plainly in a 22-second exposure!
I should add that the final images are stacks of 22-second exposures.
Post a Comment