Skip to main content

134340 Pluto, and his little brother Charon


Pluto, formally known as a Planet, has been recategorized by the International Astronomical Union on August 24, 2006 as a dwarf planet. Although no longer considered an upstanding member of the solar system (to borrow a phrase from 2 Skinnee J's), Pluto is now the largest member of the Kuiper belt. So it's not all bad for Pluto. Rather than being the smallest fish in a sea filled with giants like Jupiter, Pluto is now the largest member of a smaller sea.

But what about Charon. Charon is the largest of Pluto's moons, or rather that's what Charon used to be. Since Pluto is no longer a planet, it's inaccurate to call Charon a moon, a nickname for natural satellites such as the Earth's Moon that orbit planets.

At times Charon was even referred to as a double planet with Pluto because of its size compared to Pluto, just over half the size of Pluto. Indeed, Charon and Pluto are so close that neither actually rotates around the other. Instead they are deadlocked in an icy stare, with the same surface of each always facing the other.

Charon even used to have the unique characteristic among moons of being the largest moon in the solar system proportional to the planet which it orbited.

But no more. When Pluto lost it's status as a planet, Charon lost it's moonhood. Charon is now just another member of the Kuiper belt, and will always be second fiddle to Pluto in that sea. Even the International Astronomical Union hasn't bothered to define Charon's status, though if Pluto gets to be a dwarf planet it seems obvious that Charon should have the same designation.

For now, all we can do is wait until July 2015 when NASA's New Horizons robotic spacecraft will arrive at the Pluto-Charon system. Maybe then Charon will get the recognition it deserves. Though it seems likely that Pluto will still be hogging the spotlight.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Can and We Will Do Better - in support of #MeToo

#MeToo is a trending hashtag today, which is being shared on social media with the following post:
If all the women who have been sexually harassed or assaulted wrote "Me too" as a status, we might give people a sense of the magnitude of the problem. Please copy/paste. #MeToo Thank you to all of the people who have shared this hashtag.  Thank you for sharing your experiences and your stories.   Your courage to speak up highlights the magnitude of the problem and I believe you.

My first thought (after feeling sadness) was to wonder whether I should add my voice to this trending story.  As a man, if I add my voice will it be distracting or supportive, patronizing or empowering, helpful or hurtful?  Is the defining characteristic of my voice that it is male, or that it is white, or heterosexual, cisgendered, middle class, educated, liberal, or privileged?  I decided to write this because the defining characteristic of my voice should be first and foremost that I am another huma…

My "thank you" to Veterans is Both an Apology and a Thank You.

Today is Veteran's Day, so prepare yourself for a social media overload of flags, pictures of statues, and quotes intended to be inspiring about the sacrifice of veterans like the one on the right.  We celebrate our Veterans for their courage, their bravery and for their sacrifice, as well we should. But is it enough?

Some people will lament the fact that the celebration is only one day, or that it doesn't change the way we honor the veterans, or fail to, on other days.  The government agency tasked with helping Veterans is plagued with scandals, and the NFL has to be paid to honor the veterans.  So it's no wonder that we've gotten cynical about how much a few "thank you" messages matter.   Is it enough to say "thank you" if we don't really try to understand what the sacrifice of a veteran is?

You've probably heard someone say before that it's not what you say but how you say it.  A flat, uninterested "thank you" from someone…

Why you should watch Star Trek: a letter to my Wife.

Although I am a second generation Star Trek fan (i.e. I grew up watching Star Trek: TNG), I enjoyed the original Star Trek and even most of the later spinoffs. I am also an avid movie fan, and as such could talk for hours about the different themes presented in the many Star Trek movies, both original and TNG.

But the creation of the new Star Trek universe by J.J. Abrams presents a problem for me. Is it a gateway by which new fans will be introduced to the Star Trek I love or is it just an action movie to be enjoyed and forgotten? It is both a celebration of the old and a creation of something new to enjoy and a well balanced combination. But part of me fears that the enjoyment of the new characters and CGI action will distract some from realizing why the old Star Trek is worth celebrating.

After seeing the new Star Trek with my friends I was disturbed to discover they had not seen The Wrath of Kahn. How could you understand the Kobyashi Maru, or the welling of tears you should feel …