Interaction: Planetary warfare

Myers: Good evening, and welcome to this week's edition of Interaction, where newsmakers shake and bake, make a mistake, and then flake out and have some cake. We're in Prague, Czech Republic today, where last week the International Astronomical Union gathered to make a decision as to what objects count as planets. But did they make it wrong? Do the orbits of planets matter? Do their neighbours matter? And was the method used to make this decision fair, or did it trample on astronomers' rights? We'll examine this and more, but first it's time for the Interaction IQ, the Initial Question. Today it's from Baron in Bordeaux, France, who asks who wanted the term "planet" defined. First we'll go to the director of the Planetarium of the North Atlantic in Marystown, NL, Canada, Mr Will Shaftman.

Shaftman: 84% of kids surveyed here yesterday wanted "planet" defined.

Myers: A cabdriver in New York City, NY, USA, and a volunteer at the Science House of Brooklyn, Mr Sal Martinez.

Martinez: Most of my fares over the last month.

Myers: The author of the new book Useless but Exciting Things to See in the Night Sky, Ms Lucille Hong.

Hong: I did.

Myers: And the editor of The Space Over Australia magazine, Ms PC Willirs.

Willirs: Me too.

Myers: And I'm Debbie Myers. I wanted a definition that makes size less important. Well, the definition as currently stated requires that planets orbit the Sun, be in hydrostatic equilibrium, and "clear the neighbourhood" around their orbits. The first two criteria are relatively easy to define, but how does one "clear one's neighbourhood", Sal?

Martinez: Yeah, that's exactly the problem here, Debbie. Some are saying that Neptune's orbit isn't cleared because it has Pluto right there. Some are saying that Earth's orbit isn't cleared because of all the Earth crossing asteroids, and some are saying that Jupiter's isn't because of all the Trojan asteroids. They were supposed to end the debate when they made their decision. But really they just started a whole new debate with this ambiguous definition.

Willirs: And the definition clearly doesn't satisfy the reality on the ground, which is that millions of people around the world want Pluto to be a planet.

Myers: But why should reality on the ground matter? Shouldn't reality in space be more important?

Willirs: Look, if you choose a bad definition, nobody's going to go with it. Everybody's going to keep calling Pluto a planet no matter what. So you have to listen to the people.

Hong: That's right. Pluto was a planet when it was discovered, and it should stay a planet.

Myers: And what of Ceres?

Hong: Ceres is an asteroid.

Myers: It was considered a planet when it was discovered.

Hong: But it's in the asteroid belt.

Myers: Pluto is on the edge of the Kuiper belt.

Hong: But it's not in the Kuiper belt.

Myers: 2003 UB₃₁₃ is mostly outside the Kuiper belt.

Hong: So?

Myers: Would you consider it a planet?

Hong: No.

Myers: Why?

Hong: It's too far out.

Myers: So your definition would be that planets must be considered planets immediately, be no further than Pluto, and be outside the asteroid belt?

Hong: Right.

Myers: Would you like a rule about rotation rates whilst you're at it?

Hong: No, but thanks.

Myers: Right then. It's time to move on to viewer questions. Remember, you can use telephones, E-mails, text messages, facsimiles, envelopes, or burning bras to get your questions to us. We're going to start with a question from Cleo in Atlanta, GA, USA. Cleo, are you there?

Cleo in Atlanta: Yes, I am.

Myers: Hello Cleo. What is your question?

Cleo in Atlanta: I'm an astrologer, and I am very disappointed that me and my fellow astrologers were not consulted about this decision. We have every right –

Myers: Pardon me, Cleo. You said you were an astrologer?

Cleo in Atlanta: That's right.

Myers: Did you examine your forecast for today?

Cleo in Atlanta: I certainly did. The stars say that my voice will be heard today.

Myers: Did the stars say anything about the trap door?

Cleo in Atlanta: What trap d–aaaaaaaaaa... [voice recedes into faintness]

Myers: That should teach you to pretend to be a scientist. Bettina in Salzburg, Austria, are you there?

[Pause.]

Myers: We seem to have lost Bettina. We'll move –

Bettina in Salzburg: [weakly] I am here.

Myers: Beg pardon?

Bettina in Salzburg: I am – [clears throat] I am here.

Myers: Bettina in Salzburg?

Bettina in Salzburg: Yes.

Myers: Good. What is your question?

Bettina in Salzburg: Well... I am no longer sure I want to ask it.

Myers: Why not?

Bettina in Salzburg: It was about astrology.

Myers: There's nothing wrong with questions about astrology.

Bettina in Salzburg: But I saw what you did to the last caller.

Myers: Sure. There's obviously something wrong with astrology, but as far as questions about it, we welcome them. We should be questioning astrology.

Bettina in Salzburg: So it is okay to ask my question?

Myers: Absolutely.

Bettina in Salzburg: Very well. How will this new definition of planet affect astrologers and horoscopes?

Myers: A very good question. Thank you, Bettina. Will, what effect will this definition have on astrologers and horoscopes?

Shaftman: I bet they don't care. Remember, a lot of them claim to take asteroids into account.

Willirs: Hey, do any of them take Quaoar or Sedna into account?

Shaftman: I wouldn't be surprised.

Hong: Hey, wait a minute.

Myers: Yes?

Hong: Did you just compliment a caller?

Myers: Yes.

Hong: That's a first for you, isn't it?

Myers: I compliment people.

Hong: This is the first time I've seen it.

Myers: I compliment people all the time! You're just not paying attention!

Hong: There. Now you're back to your usual, bitchy self.

Myers: I'm not bitchy!

Hong: You are. Isn't she? Come on.

Martinez: Yeah, completely.

Willirs: Ummm...

Shaftman: Not really.

Martinez: I hear it all the time in my cab. "How about that girl from Interaction? She's such a bitch!"

Myers: What, really?

Martinez: Yeah, but they love you for it. They like how you always say what they're thinking.

Myers: I'm not bitchy. Look, let's just go on to our last question. It's a text message from someone calling herself... what? "DebbieFan69"? You said that's a girl? Uh-uh. There's no way in hell that's a girl.

Martinez: See?

Myers: What? That wasn't bitchiness.

Martinez: Sure it was. We were all thinking it, and then you said it. That's exactly what everybody likes.

Myers: [glares at Martinez] In any case, "DebbieFan69" asks whether voting procedures will be reformed at the IAU after this scandal. A bit overstating things with that "scandal" business, but the point is valid. So will – that was another compliment, by the way.

Hong: What, that her point was valid? That's a weak-ass compliment.

Myers: What the hell do you know about compliments? You won't even compliment 2003 UB₃₁₃ as equal in status to Pluto.

Hong: It isn't!

Willirs: It is. Xena is just as much a planet as Pluto or Mercury.

Myers: Getting back to the question, how will the IAU's voting procedures be altered?

Martinez: If they're smart, they let its members vote online. They're mostly in academia, so we don't have to worry about whether they have Internet access.

Myers: That's a good idea.

Hong: Hold it. Now you're just trying too hard to compliment.

Myers: I am not!

Hong: We all know what's going on here, Debbie.

Myers: All right, just for that, this programme's over. Ms PC Willirs, Ms Lucille Hong, Mr Sal Martinez, and Mr Will Shaftman, thanks for being here in Prague. Next week we'll be talking about the Global Warming Solutions Act, which recently passed the California State Assembly and demands drastic cuts in carbon emissions. We'll speak with a consumer group leader, an industry group leader, a petroleum seller, and a petroleum consumer. Remember that you can send in your questions for next week's guests at our website, interaction.goobnet.net Until then, good night.

Martinez: And as for whether that "DebbieFan69" is a guy or girl, which would you prefer?

Myers: I haven't any interest in someone childish enough to come up with that username.