• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Thanks for reminding me that Van Jones needs to be slapped.

In short, I come down firmly on all sides of the issue.

Let’s not be the monsters we hate.

That’s my take and I am available for criticism at this time.

Battle won, war still ongoing.

The willow is too close to the house.

Insiders who complain to politico: please report to the white house office of shut the fuck up.

Speaking of republicans, is there a way for a political party to declare intellectual bankruptcy?

White supremacy is terrorism.

An almost top 10,000 blog!

Following reporting rules is only for the little people, apparently.

A thin legal pretext to veneer over their personal religious and political desires

The worst democrat is better than the best republican.

This blog will pay for itself.

Do not shrug your shoulders and accept the normalization of untruths.

Yeah, with this crowd one never knows.

He really is that stupid.

Come on, media. you have one job. start doing it.

JFC, are there no editors left at that goddamn rag?

Too often we hand the biggest microphones to the cynics and the critics who delight in declaring failure.

We are builders in a constant struggle with destroyers. let’s win this.

You don’t get rid of your umbrella while it’s still raining.

This really is a full service blog.

Nancy smash is sick of your bullshit.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Science & Technology / He Only Looks Small Because He’s A Long Ways Off

He Only Looks Small Because He’s A Long Ways Off

by Tim F|  February 2, 20064:29 pm| 44 Comments

This post is in: Science & Technology

FacebookTweetEmail

A few years ago the solar system got a bit more crowded when astronomers at the Palomar Observatory spotted a tenth ‘planet,’ romantically named 2003 UB313, circling the sun out beyond Pluto’s orbit. Questions of whether this thing constituted a real planet or just an especially reflective asteroid should have been put to bed last year when some folks at the Keck Lab in Hawaii discovered that the rock, codenamed ‘Xena,’ has a moon.

Xena moon
Who’s an asteroid now, tough guy

Some people weren’t satisfied. Maybe it’s a big asteroid with a really little asteroid spinning around it, they said. Nope (Nature, subscription wall. you know the drill):

The recently discovered ‘tenth planet’ of our Solar System is substantially larger than Pluto, astronomers have found.

For many, the discovery that object 2003 UB313 is about 3,000 kilometres across will remove any doubt that it deserves to be called a planet.

…When astronomer Mike Brown of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena unveiled 2003 UB313 to the world in July 2005, his team was already confident that the new object was at least as large as Pluto, and deserved the status of ‘planet’.

But UB313’s elongated orbit takes it almost twice as far away from the Sun as Pluto ever gets, making it very difficult to measure its diameter precisely. One clue to its larger size came from the fact that it is slightly brighter than Pluto; a larger mirror would reflect more of the Sun’s light. But an alternative explanation could have been that UB313 is simply made of a more reflective material than Pluto.

Using the Institute for Millimetre Radio Astronomy (IRAM) 30-metre telescope in Spain, Bertoldi’s team has now studied the radiowaves coming from UB313, which reveal how much of the Sun’s rays are absorbed and re-radiated as heat. Because very little reflected sunlight is emitted at these wavelengths, the object’s brightness in radiowaves depends only on its size and surface temperature.

Based on its enormous distance from the Sun, UB313 is calculated to be tremendously cold: a staggering -248 °C. Bertoldi and his colleagues combined this value with their measurements of UB313’s radiation to determine its reflectivity and size.

Assuming they’re about the same density (they’re not, but bear with me), that puts Xena at about 2.3 times as massive as Pluto and one-75th as massive as our own blue rock. The International Astronomical Union (IAU) hasn’t thought up a proper name yet, so if you have any ideas you can either leave them here or drop them a line yourself.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Lucky Strike
Next Post: Crash Sucks »

Reader Interactions

44Comments

  1. 1.

    Steve

    February 2, 2006 at 4:35 pm

    But lots of things are bigger than Pluto. It’s like taking the stats of the worst player in the Hall of Fame and saying anyone with better stats is therefore a Hall of Famer.

    I was under the impression that there isn’t necessarily a fixed standard for calling something a “planet,” but I was also under the pretty clear impression that the only reason Pluto is still considered a planet is tradition.

  2. 2.

    Pb

    February 2, 2006 at 4:36 pm

    Planet X. Duh.

    Alternatively, how about Hoth?

    Anyhow, sorry CIT-Pasadena, but I’ll be damned if anyone named “Mike Brown” gets a planet named after them, and “Brownie” is right out. Nothing personal, at least, not directed at you guys.

  3. 3.

    DougJ

    February 2, 2006 at 4:40 pm

    Bush is announcing that, planet or not, 2003 UB313 has just joined the coalition of the willing. They’ll be sending three tons of ice to Iraq.

  4. 4.

    DougJ

    February 2, 2006 at 4:42 pm

    New Jack Planet.

  5. 5.

    kl

    February 2, 2006 at 4:44 pm

    Considering its density and inability to sustain life, I propose we call it Cindysheehan.

  6. 6.

    Bruce Moomaw

    February 2, 2006 at 4:45 pm

    I hope they name it Persephone — she got badly cheated back in 1978 when Pluto’s first (and major) moon was discovered. The discoverer intended to give it that name — especially poetically appropriate since the two worlds are tidally locked and eternally keep the same face toward each other — but, by extremely bad luck, his wife was named Charlene and so he decided to honor her by instead naming it “Charon”. Apart from being harder to decide on the pronunciation of it, this immediately led to confusion (continuing to this day) with “Chiron”, the first outer Solar System asteroidal object, which had been discovered just the year before and was a major find in itself.

    As for whether or not Pluto is a “planet”, that debate, God help us, is still going on; the only thing more impressive than its durability is its absurdity. I wrote an article on it back in 1999 and stand by my opinion then: since the size borderline between “planet” and “nonplanet” is ultimately arbitrary, the best thing to do is set the cutoff at 2000 km diameter — thus allowing Pluto (which is only slightly bigger) to retain its long-time historical membership in the Planet Club without letting all sorts of tiny riffraff in.

  7. 7.

    Steve

    February 2, 2006 at 4:45 pm

    Surely there must be more Roman gods out there to name planets after. I always wondered why, of all the gods they could have chosen from, they picked the easy joke-fodder “Uranus.”

    What I actually found out the other day is that apparently Uranus, which was the first planet to be discovered in the modern era, was originally named after King George by the British astronomers who found it. But no one outside of England was willing to call it “The Georgian Planet” (seriously, that was the name!) so eventually Uranus became the standard. England was the last country to actually give in and accept Uranus as the name, though!

  8. 8.

    Nutcase

    February 2, 2006 at 4:47 pm

    I was under the impression that there isn’t necessarily a fixed standard for calling something a “planet,” but I was also under the pretty clear impression that the only reason Pluto is still considered a planet is tradition.

    That’s definitely a debate just now. Is Pluto a really small planet, or a really big asteroid, or…?

    Marcy and Butler have decided that, OK, Pluto gets to be a planet, but that’s as small as they come.

  9. 9.

    tzs

    February 2, 2006 at 4:51 pm

    Lessee, are we going to keep ourselves to the Olympian gods or allow other Greek deities into the soup?

    I like Persephone, though. Makes me hope we don’t find anything else out there; we’re sorta short on chthonic gods…

  10. 10.

    StupidityRules

    February 2, 2006 at 4:54 pm

    Pluto shouldn’t be considered a planet nor should this one.

  11. 11.

    Clever

    February 2, 2006 at 4:59 pm

    Cthulhu

    That would be awesome. I can just imagine grade school science professors trying to say it, then trying to explain what the hell it is.

    For those not in the know: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cthulhu

  12. 12.

    Bruce Moomaw

    February 2, 2006 at 5:02 pm

    The trouble with just kicking both Pluto and this one out of the Planet Club is that there is an excellent chance that there are other objects out in the Kuiper Belt (or in the Oort Cloud, several trillion miles from the Sun, where we may never find them even if they DO exist) that are clearly intermediate in size between Pluto and 2003 UB 313 on the one hand, and Mercury — the smallest unquestioned planet — on the other. (In fact, there may be some undiscovered objects out there as big as Earth.) So if you throw Pluto and this New Guy out of the Planet Club on size grounds but still keep Mercury in, you’ve just set another totally arbitrary size cutoff — but at a different point that’s more historically confusing.

  13. 13.

    LITBMueller

    February 2, 2006 at 5:04 pm

    Halliburton

  14. 14.

    Otto Man

    February 2, 2006 at 5:05 pm

    Maybe it’s a big asteroid with a really little asteroid spinning around it, they said.

    Rusty Griswold: Hey, you got Pac Man?
    Cousin Dale: No.
    Rusty Griswold: Space Invaders?
    Cousin Dale: Nope.
    Rusty Griswold: You got Asteroids?
    Cousin Dale: Naw, but my dad does. Can’t even sit on the toilet some days.

  15. 15.

    Paul Wartenberg

    February 2, 2006 at 5:39 pm

    If it’s bigger than your SUV and has something slightly smaller orbiting it, it’s a planet. Okay? Argument solved.

    My deal is, we’re kinda running out of Greco/Roman nomens for planets. Any chance we could start getting the Norse gods involved? Fenrir, the wolf of the final winter of Ragnorok. That’d be a good name for a cold world.

  16. 16.

    Joey

    February 2, 2006 at 5:41 pm

    Alternatively, how about Hoth?

    Yes.
    “There isn’t enough life on this rock to fill a space cruiser.”

  17. 17.

    Pb

    February 2, 2006 at 5:42 pm

    Paul,

    Good call. Maybe Jotunheim would be a good name for a planet. :)

  18. 18.

    ACT

    February 2, 2006 at 6:00 pm

    I nominate Urrectum!

  19. 19.

    StupidityRules

    February 2, 2006 at 6:01 pm

    If it’s bigger than your SUV and has something slightly smaller orbiting it, it’s a planet. Okay? Argument solved.

    Then I’m guessing that neither of Mercury and Venus would be planets…

    Anyway. Pluto is a Kuiper Belt Object.

  20. 20.

    Steve

    February 2, 2006 at 6:22 pm

    Then I’m guessing that neither of Mercury and Venus would be planets…

    If A, then B. Does it necessarily follow that if not-A, then not-B? Of course not.

  21. 21.

    StupidityRules

    February 2, 2006 at 6:37 pm

    Since it was if A AND B then C.

    If it had only been if A then C then every astroid between Mars and Jupiter bigger than a SUV would be a planet… And there’s a lot of them there that’s bigger than a SUV….

    Anyway… I belong to the group of people who doesn’t count astroids nor kuiper belt objects as planets.

  22. 22.

    Joey

    February 2, 2006 at 6:42 pm

    Since it was if A AND B then C.

    That still doesn’t disqualify A or B from being C by themselves, just that if they are together it is most definitely C.

  23. 23.

    Steve

    February 2, 2006 at 6:54 pm

    If a woman is gay AND has no bisexual urges, then she’s not going to be attracted to me.

    Does it therefore follow that every other woman in the world is attracted to me? If only.

  24. 24.

    Perry Como

    February 2, 2006 at 6:58 pm

    Naming planets after pagan gods is an assault on Christianity. Why can’t it be called Moses? Or Abraham?

  25. 25.

    Joey

    February 2, 2006 at 6:59 pm

    Naming planets after pagan gods is an assault on Christianity.

    Heh, nice.

  26. 26.

    StupidityRules

    February 2, 2006 at 7:01 pm

    Ok. True. It should have been stated: if and only if A and B then C.

    But if it isn’t exclusive then this rule can’t be the only one to decide if something is a planet or not…

    Anyway, lots of new planets… :)

  27. 27.

    StupidityRules

    February 2, 2006 at 7:03 pm

    Also, most people won’t think of the difference between “If A and B then C” and “If and only if A and B then C”…

  28. 28.

    Joey

    February 2, 2006 at 7:26 pm

    Also, most people won’t think of the difference between “If A and B then C” and “If and only if A and B then C”…

    That’s because most people have poor logic skills.

  29. 29.

    demimondian

    February 2, 2006 at 7:42 pm

    For non-planetary bodies, we’ve never required Roman names — at least one of the major Kuiper belt objects is named after a Mayan diety, for instance. (That, by the way, is what I expect to see happen — Kuiper belt objects of significant mass will we referred to as “major”, and we’ll simply be silent on whether they’re actually planets or not. After all, all the ones we’ve found are sufficiently anomalous — highly eccentric orbits, primary/satellite mass ratios of .89, etc — than we can say “whether or not they’re truly planets, they still deserve a sategory of their own.”)

  30. 30.

    Krista

    February 2, 2006 at 8:36 pm

    Being a Galactica nut, I propose we name it Kobol.

  31. 31.

    demimondian

    February 2, 2006 at 8:41 pm

    Kobol

    More Dungeons and Dragons references…

  32. 32.

    canuckistani

    February 2, 2006 at 8:49 pm

    I think the only solution is to set the planetary threshold over the tens of thousands of KBO’s, but allow Pluto to keep its planetary status by some kind of grandfather clause. That means we don’t need to memorize thousands of obscure god names to help our kids with their science projects.

  33. 33.

    Joey

    February 2, 2006 at 8:58 pm

    Being a Galactica nut, I propose we name it Kobol.

    Also very good. Battlestar is far and away the best show on tv, sci-fi or not. Though I still like Hoth slightly more. It just fits with the freezing temps and everything.

  34. 34.

    Krista

    February 2, 2006 at 9:14 pm

    How about Iset? (Norweigian for “icy”)

  35. 35.

    Steve

    February 2, 2006 at 9:31 pm

    All of this will become irrelevant when the GOP rehabilitates Ptolemy’s geocentric theory.

  36. 36.

    Bruce Moomaw

    February 2, 2006 at 9:55 pm

    Actually, they have started using non Greco-Roman mythology to name Saturn’s flock of newly discovered “irregular” satellites (tiny captured asteroids, some of which orbit the planet backwards). The only member of the flock known until a few years ago was Phoebe; but now there are about a dozen, and they’ve started using not only Norse mythology (one of them is named Ymir), but even Eskimo mythology.

    And the moons of Uranus were always an exception — Herschel himself named the first two after the fairies in “A Midsummer Night’s Dream”; the next two in the mid- 19th century were named after a character in the “The Tempest” and another in Alexander Pope’s “The Rape of the Lock”; and so every Uranian moon since then has also been named after characters from those three Shakespeare and Pope fantasy plays or poems. Of course, those are going to run out VERY soon.

  37. 37.

    Caleb

    February 2, 2006 at 10:06 pm

    Man,

    I can’t believe no one has come up with the most obvious name for this new planet…….Goofey.

    :-)

  38. 38.

    Caleb

    February 2, 2006 at 10:07 pm

    Of course it would help if I had a spell check.

    Make that…..Goofy.

  39. 39.

    Gary Farber

    February 2, 2006 at 11:23 pm

    Blogged about Xena’s moon, Gabrielle, January 2nd.

    Blogged about the size finding yesterday in a post with a bunch of other science-related stuff I thought interesting or amusing.

    Gee, I read you guys more than once a day, usually, and link to you with some mild frequency. But I’m much more boring, I guess. Oh, well.

  40. 40.

    John Cole

    February 2, 2006 at 11:57 pm

    I propose we call it Dobsonia, because it is fucking out there.

  41. 41.

    DougJ

    February 3, 2006 at 1:15 am

    There’s a big scandal brewing at NASA. Heck of a job, Brownie, part 2?

  42. 42.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    February 3, 2006 at 5:13 am

    Speaking of being fucking out there…

    I nominate we call the new planet, “Boner” the name of the new majority leader Johnny Boehner.

    Seriously, the way his name is spelled, it should be pronounced “Boner”. From here out I will refer to him as Rep. Boner.

  43. 43.

    Krista

    February 3, 2006 at 9:16 am

    John Cole Says:

    I propose we call it Dobsonia, because it is fucking out there

    Very nice.

    Or, we could call it Coulter, because it’s cold, loopy, and is nowhere near planet Earth.

  44. 44.

    Yakboy

    February 3, 2006 at 10:30 pm

    I gotta go with Libitina, the goddess of the dead. Fitting for being way the heck out there, especially as Pluto (god of the underworld) is the next one in.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • lowtechcyclist on Sunday Morning Open Thread: Cherish the Wins (Jun 4, 2023 @ 2:25pm)
  • Miss Bianca on Sunday Morning Open Thread: Cherish the Wins (Jun 4, 2023 @ 2:22pm)
  • different-church-lady on Sunday Morning Open Thread: Cherish the Wins (Jun 4, 2023 @ 2:22pm)
  • different-church-lady on Sunday Morning Open Thread: Cherish the Wins (Jun 4, 2023 @ 2:21pm)
  • Ruckus on Sunday Morning Open Thread: Cherish the Wins (Jun 4, 2023 @ 2:20pm)

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Seattle Meetup on Sat 5/13 at 5pm!

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Classified Documents: A Primer
State & Local Elections Discussion

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!