Demotion of Pluto as a planet

[Brendan McKay]

But the winner and the next one include Pluto which is no
longer a planet, so why are they even considered?

Brendan.

* Jonathan Post <jvospost3 at gmail.com> [060827 04:06]:
> Post-Pluto mnemonics for the planets
> 
> Jason Kottke and Meg Hourihan held a competition to
> come up with a better mnemonic for the planets' names
> in the wake of the decision to demote Pluto
> from planet-status. The winner, Josh Mishell's
> "My! Very educated morons just screwed up numerous
> planetariums" is great, as are the runners-up:
> 
>    Many Very Earnest Men Just Snubbed Unfortunate
> Ninth Planet (Dave Child)
> 
>    "My vision, erased. Mercy! Just some underachiever
> now." (Delia, as spoken by Pluto discoverer Clyde
> Tombaugh)
> 
>    Most vexing experience, mother just served us
> nothing! (Bart Baxter)
> 
> 
> 
> On 8/26/06, Gene Smith <genewardsmith at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >On 8/25/06, William Rex Marshall <w.r.marshall at actrix.co.nz> wrote:
> >
> >> From: "Gene Smith" <genewardsmith at gmail.com>
> >
> > But Xena is a
> >> full-fledged planet!
> >
> >Not according to the IAU:
> >http://www.iau2006.org/mirror/www.iau.org/iau0603/index.html
> >
> >I know. My comment was about what the definition says.
> >
> >If you use Steven Soter's "planetary discriminant" you get the bizarre
> >result that Earth and Venus are more planet-like than Jupiter or 
> >Saturn, and
> >that Neptune is the least planet-like of the major planets.
> >
> >Here's a Wikipedia article I just did:
> >
> >
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_system_objects_by_planetary_discriminant
> >
> >Here's an integer sequence, the number from the Sun in order of 
> >planetary
> >discriminant: 3, 2, 5, 6, 4, 1, 7, 8. Here's another, order in  terms of
> >mass by decending planetary discriminant: 5, 6, 1, 2, 7, 8, 3, 4.
> >
> >