<p>So the nytimes is telling me Dr. Mike E. Brown - who discovered the 10th planet 2003 UB313 this year - might have discovered an 11th. Argh, if I were cleverer I'd like to get into some astrophysics. Anyway, just thought I'd share :).</p>
<p>"When he was finishing up his undergraduate degree in physics at Princeton, he thought he would pursue theoretical work in cosmology, devising ideas about how the universe came together.</p>
<p>Then James Peebles, a physics professor at Princeton, mentioned to him how astronomy needed more observers actually looking at the sky.</p>
<p>"That was it," Dr. Brown recalled. "As soon as he said it, I was like, O.K.""</p>
<p>In less happy news:
"John N. Bahcall, an astrophysicist who helped prove what makes the sun shine and worked behind the scenes in Washington for more than three decades to help ensure the construction and survival of the Hubble Space Telescope, died on Wednesday at NewYork-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell hospital. He was 70.</p>
<p>A professor for 35 years at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J., Dr. Bahcall was one of the scientific brahmins of his time, leading numerous influential committees and organizations, including the American Physical Society and the American Astronomical Society, and advising NASA and Congress.</p>
<p>He led the National Academy of Sciences panel that produced an influential report in 1990 laying out what should be done in the next decade of astronomy. In 1964, Dr. Bahcall and Raymond Davis, of the Brookhaven National Laboratory, began a lifelong collaboration when they suggested testing theories of what happens inside the sun by measuring the flow of subatomic particles called neutrinos, produced by its nuclear reactions.
"</p>
<p>i didn't read the article, but i doubt brown's "discovery" will change anything.</p>
<p>what most people don't realize is that "planet" is an abstract distinction. there are more things orbiting the sun than we could imagine, and the current model is really just a consequence of the relative ease of observability of the 9 "current planets."</p>
<p>in fact, there has been debate for years over whether or not pluto should be considered a planet at all. many astronomers maintain (with reasonable evidence) that pluto is just a relatively large kaiper object. (the kaiper belt is essentially a bunch of ice orbiting around the circumference of the solar system)</p>
<p>...there are some reasons why people hesitate to stop calling pluto a planet; there is some emotion attatched. it's the first planet to be discovered in the modern era, and it was discovered in the U.S. Clyde Tombaugh is also a bit of an old fart. They might just be waiting for him to croak before they rewrite the science texts. </p>