El baile de los planetas (II)
David Barrado y Navascués
Seguimos con la discusión sobre qué es y qué no es un planeta…
La reunión de la asamblea general de la Unión Astronómica Internacional continua en Praga. En los diferentes corrillos domina la conversación sobre la propuesta de definición del término «planeta«. Me comentan que el disgusto de un número significativo de astrónomos es grande, el desacuerdo es evidente. La política domina. El sector americano insiste en conservar el status para Plutón, y garantizarlo para 2003 UB(313), ambos descubiertos por americanos, de manera que el Sistema Solar contendría doce planetas en lugar de los nueve tradicionales (o los ocho si se eliminase a Plutón de la lista, opción que yo apoyo). El lobby funciona a diferentes niveles. Un ejemplo, artículo de Gibor Basri y Mike Brown (descubridor de 2003 UB) en astro-ph, el repositorio de artículos astronómicos, esta misma mañana.
Mientas tanto, una propuesta alternativa adquiere más y más fuerza. La votación será este mismo jueves.
Propuesta alternativa, que traduciré a lo largo de la mañana (cortesía de Javier Licandro):
New proposal for Resolution 5: Definition of a Planet
(1) A planet is a celestial body that (a) is by far the largest object in its local population [1], (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape [2], (c) does not produce energy by any nuclear fusion mechanism [3].
(2) According to point (1) the eight classical planets discovered before 1900, which move in nearly circular orbits close to the ecliptic plane are the only planets of our Solar System. All the other objects in orbit around the Sun are smaller than Mercury. We recognize that there are objects that fulfill the criteria (b) and (c) but not criterion (a). Those objects are defined as «dwarf» planets. Ceres as well as Pluto and several other large Trans-Neptunian objects belong to this category. In contrast to the planets, these objects typically have highly inclined orbits and/or large eccentricities.
(3) All the other natural objects orbiting the Sun that do not fulfill any of the previous criteria shall be referred to collectively as “Small Solar System Bodies”.[4]
PD: Traducción de la propuesta alternativa.
Un planeta es un objeto celeste que:
a) es el de mayor objeto de la población local,
b) contiene suficiente masa como para que su fuerza de gravedad sea dominante, de manera que se encuentre en equilibrio hidrostático,
c) no produce energía a partir de reacciones nucleares de fusión.
ENLACES:
Planetas: preguntas y respuestas de la IAU
Más en:
El baile de los planetas
El baile de los planetas (II)
El baile de los planetas (III)
¿Qué es un planeta?…
Just one of those reads that left me feeling slightly more capable rather than overwhelmed, and a look at progressstructure kept that empowering feel going, the difference between content that builds the reader up and content that intimidates them is huge and this site clearly knows which side of that line to stand.
Considered alongside other sources I have been reading this one consistently rises to the top, and a stop at progressformsnaturally maintained that top ranking, the informal ongoing comparison between sources is something I do whenever reading on a topic and this site keeps coming out near the top of those comparisons over many sessions.
Halfway through I knew I would finish the post, and a stop at collaborativesuccessbond also held me through to the end, content that signals its quality early and then sustains it is content with real internal consistency and this site has clearly figured out how to maintain quality from opening sentence through to closing thought.
Refreshing tone compared to the dry corporate posts on similar topics, and a stop at focusignition carried that personality through nicely, you can tell when a real person is behind the writing versus a content team chasing metrics and this site definitely falls into the former category clearly across what I have seen.
Left me wanting to read more rather than feeling burned out, that is a good sign, and a look at visionactionloop confirmed there is plenty more here to explore, the kind of writing that builds appetite rather than killing it which is a rare quality on the modern open internet today across most categories of content.
The tone stayed consistent across the whole post which is harder than it looks for longer pieces, and a look at actiondeployment continued the same voice, this kind of editorial consistency is a sign of either a single careful writer or a tightly run team and either is impressive today across the broader media environment.
Great work on keeping things readable, the post never drags or repeats itself which I really appreciate, and a stop at directioncreatesleverage added a bit more context that fit naturally with what was already said here, no need to read everything twice to get the point being made today.
Solid endorsement from me, the writing earns it, and a look at unitedvisionbond continues to earn it across the broader site too, the kind of operation that maintains quality across many pages rather than just one viral post is a sign of serious commitment and that is what I see here clearly across what I read.
If I had to defend the time I spend reading independent blogs this site would feature in the defence, and a look at claritypathways reinforced that defensive utility, the ongoing case for non algorithmic reading is one I make to myself periodically and sites like this one provide the actual evidence that supports the case clearly.
Excellent post, balanced and well organised without showing off, and a stop at focusguidesexecution continued in that same vein, this site has clearly figured out the formula for content that works for readers rather than for search engine ranking signals which is harder than it sounds today and worth real recognition from anyone.
Now thinking I want more sites built on this kind of editorial foundation, and a stop at momentumchannel extended that wish into a broader hope, sites built on substance and care rather than on metrics and growth are the kind of sites I want to see more of and this one is a small example worth supporting.
Now considering whether the post would translate well into a different form, and a look at intentionalpathway suggested similar versatility, content that could move into other media without losing its substance is content that has been built around ideas rather than around format and this site reads as idea first throughout posts.
Coming back to this one, definitely, and a quick visit to claritypowersmovement only made me more sure of that, the kind of writing that makes you want to set aside time later rather than rushing through it now while distracted by everything else competing for attention on the screen today across so many tabs.