Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Ojuice5001 · 10-08-2002, 05:43 AM

A new planet has been discovered! Okay, not really a planet, but it's bigger and more cohesive than a comet, and it is a ball of various kinds of ice.<a href="http://msnbc.com/news/818195.asp?pre-msn#BODY" target="_blank">News article about it</a>

Needless to say, I like how the planets are named after my gods. The Christians and atheists have caused the gods to recede from public consciousness in a lot of ways, but not this. Even some asteroids were named after Roman gods; Vesta, Pallas Athene, etc., deserve much better worlds named after them, if you ask me. Now, Quaoar is not a figure in Roman mythology, however it is the name of a figure in the religion indigenous to California, where Quaoar was first discovered. I find this interesting, because it is a break in tradition for no obvious naturalistic reason. However, it makes perfect sense that this was a successful attempt by the Californian gods to gain more influence in the world and solar system by having a pseudo-planet named after them--it gives Quaoar a considerable amount of influence. The gods do exist, people!

I feel kind of special, being the first one to start a thread about Quaoar.

[ October 08, 2002: Message edited by: Ojuice5001 ]</p>

DarkDruid · 10-08-2002, 09:29 AM

What?

Autonemesis · 10-08-2002, 09:34 AM

It's not like astronomy isn't already confusing enough to the public, but I wonder if these geniuses ever thought that maybe there's some other Qu-ending-with-ar name for some other object completely unrelated to the Kuiper belt, like... (oh, I don't know, maybe you never heard of it...) QUASAR?!?! I mean, come on. This name of theirs differs by only one letter from another term that is mentioned in probably - just a guess - every other paper that has been published since they were discovered, what? - almost 40 years ago. I guess that's fairly recent on a astronomical timescale, so maybe they have an excuse for not having been informed of the new research.

Quote:

Did you mean to search for:quasar

No, Google, I did not mean to search for "quasar".

Tom Sawyer · 10-08-2002, 09:46 AM

This is just a preliminary name, not the official one. I hope to hell that they change it, because it just sucks.

Regardless of what it sounds like or ehat it means, it's just a bad name and I don't like it.

Coragyps · 10-08-2002, 10:04 AM

Take it easy on the asteroid-hunters, guys: there are well over 20,000 of the little buggers whose orbits are well enough known to get names, and only a few thousand have names now. So they're really having to dig for good ones. My personal favorite is Zappafrank.

Shadowy Man · 10-08-2002, 10:52 AM

This is an important discovery because they were able to actually resolve the object with HST. Most size estimates are based on an assumption of the object's albedo (or reflectivity).

In case you are interested, here's a picture of it:

And yes, the name kinda sucks but will need approval from the IAU before it is official.

[ October 08, 2002: Message edited by: Shadowy Man ]</p>

Friar Bellows · 10-08-2002, 12:56 PM

I'm happy with its name. I love it when people are forced to pronounce unfamiliar words. It's the only thing I'm really good at.

Jesse · 10-08-2002, 01:02 PM

Ojuice5001:
However, it makes perfect sense that this was a successful attempt by the Californian gods to gain more influence in the world and solar system by having a pseudo-planet named after them--it gives Quaoar a considerable amount of influence. The gods do exist, people!

Sounds like a <a href="http://www.neilgaiman.com/journal/journal.asp" target="_blank">Neil Gaiman</a> story...

Gregg · 10-08-2002, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kind Bud:
<strong>It's not like astronomy isn't already confusing enough to the public, but I wonder if these geniuses ever thought that maybe there's some other Qu-ending-with-ar name for some other object completely unrelated to the Kuiper belt, like... (oh, I don't know, maybe you never heard of it...) QUASAR?!?!</strong>

Disney will be making a new movie soon called "The Adventures of Pluto and Quaoar."

Gregg

Liquidrage · 10-08-2002, 02:47 PM

To me it's a planet.

What makes a planet/moon round while most asteroids are not? Is it not the gravitational force pulling the surface inwards and thus creating the round shape?

And if an object has enough mass to have this process occur (the rounding, all objects obviously have the process) and it is orbiting a star directly then to me that is a planet.

10-08-2002, 05:43 AM	#1
Ojuice5001 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: A city in Florida that I love Posts: 3,416	Quaoar A new planet has been discovered! Okay, not really a planet, but it's bigger and more cohesive than a comet, and it is a ball of various kinds of ice.<a href="http://msnbc.com/news/818195.asp?pre-msn#BODY" target="_blank">News article about it</a> Needless to say, I like how the planets are named after my gods. The Christians and atheists have caused the gods to recede from public consciousness in a lot of ways, but not this. Even some asteroids were named after Roman gods; Vesta, Pallas Athene, etc., deserve much better worlds named after them, if you ask me. Now, Quaoar is not a figure in Roman mythology, however it is the name of a figure in the religion indigenous to California, where Quaoar was first discovered. I find this interesting, because it is a break in tradition for no obvious naturalistic reason. However, it makes perfect sense that this was a successful attempt by the Californian gods to gain more influence in the world and solar system by having a pseudo-planet named after them--it gives Quaoar a considerable amount of influence. The gods do exist, people! I feel kind of special, being the first one to start a thread about Quaoar. [ October 08, 2002: Message edited by: Ojuice5001 ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-08-2002, 09:29 AM	#2
DarkDruid Regular Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 131	What?

10-08-2002, 09:46 AM	#4
Tom Sawyer Talk Freethought Staff Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Toronto, eh Posts: 42,293	This is just a preliminary name, not the official one. I hope to hell that they change it, because it just sucks. Regardless of what it sounds like or ehat it means, it's just a bad name and I don't like it.

10-08-2002, 10:04 AM	#5
Coragyps Veteran Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Snyder,Texas,USA Posts: 4,411	Take it easy on the asteroid-hunters, guys: there are well over 20,000 of the little buggers whose orbits are well enough known to get names, and only a few thousand have names now. So they're really having to dig for good ones. My personal favorite is Zappafrank.

10-08-2002, 10:52 AM	#6
Shadowy Man Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: A Shadowy Planet Posts: 7,585	This is an important discovery because they were able to actually resolve the object with HST. Most size estimates are based on an assumption of the object's albedo (or reflectivity). In case you are interested, here's a picture of it: And yes, the name kinda sucks but will need approval from the IAU before it is official. [ October 08, 2002: Message edited by: Shadowy Man ]</p>

10-08-2002, 12:56 PM	#7
Friar Bellows Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: arse-end of the world Posts: 2,305	I'm happy with its name. I love it when people are forced to pronounce unfamiliar words. It's the only thing I'm really good at.

10-08-2002, 01:02 PM	#8
Jesse Moderator - Science Discussions Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Providence, RI, USA Posts: 9,908	Ojuice5001: However, it makes perfect sense that this was a successful attempt by the Californian gods to gain more influence in the world and solar system by having a pseudo-planet named after them--it gives Quaoar a considerable amount of influence. The gods do exist, people! Sounds like a <a href="http://www.neilgaiman.com/journal/journal.asp" target="_blank">Neil Gaiman</a> story...

10-08-2002, 02:47 PM	#10
Liquidrage Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Tallahassee Posts: 1,301	To me it's a planet. What makes a planet/moon round while most asteroids are not? Is it not the gravitational force pulling the surface inwards and thus creating the round shape? And if an object has enough mass to have this process occur (the rounding, all objects obviously have the process) and it is orbiting a star directly then to me that is a planet.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.