TheKnightWho
Established Member
1, despite Pluto's odd shape orbit it's barycentre lies within the Sun.
Jupiter's doesn't, and the Sun's wobble is caused by this.
2, yes it might not exist, but the principle remains. Comet like gas giants with trails have been detected already.
3, it's good to know that the asteroid that exploded over Russia a few years ago won't happen ever again now were a planet! As all asteriods have been cleared, umm they are over 10,000 Near Earth Objects catalogued already so I doubt that's the case.
Also Pluto and Charon have few if any craters unlike Mercury or Mars so maybe they are not many collisions out there as previsiously expected.
I feel there is far too much nostalgia for when there were 8 known planets. I think some people are scared to learn of too many planets that they won't know the names of.
Here's Mordor.
1) The barycentre of its orbit with its moons is the important part here - not its orbit with the sun. Every planet's barycentre with its satellites lies within itself - this is not the case for Pluto.
2) The reason the criterion exists is precisely *because* it is physically impossible. Things over a certain size achieve hydrostatic equilibrium - that's just the way things are. You might as well complain that the definition of water includes that it's wet.
3) You're missing the fact that these are not asteroids in *stable orbits*. Most are knocked out of the asteroid belt or the Kuiper belt by interactions within said belts, and if they do end up in stable orbits around the sun inevitably do so outside of the orbits of the planets. Occasionally this is because they crash into them, but almost always because they're thrown out of those orbits by that very planet.