How is the tenth planet like?
112225
The tenth planet is like really great, thanks for asking.  He spins around and around and makes one revolution around the sun about once every several thousand thousand years.  Therefore you might call this tenth planet (he doesn't mind) a chunk of ice, and not really planet-like at all.  But wait, you're saying, Pluto is a chunk of ice and also a planet!  Well, Pluto actually (he's telling me now) doesn't even consider himself a planet, as he's really just a large ice-chunk in the Kuiper Belt.  The tenth planet (we'll call him "Frank", that's what he prefers) is a little peeved that Pluto gets a thousand-brother belt to wear and all he's got is the occasional through-comet.  We can't help you, Frank, I'm sorry.  We're like, a billion miles away.
570974
Are you talking about a real planet or Nibiru (aka Planet X)?  Note how I differentiate between the two.\n\nIf you're talking about a real planet (which I hope you are) it will probably depend on whether we end up changing how we define "planet" to accommodate new bodies that are being found beyond the orbit of Pluto.  If Pluto loses its planet status or new bodies are found, it would of course change which body is designated the "tenth planet."\n\nRegarding the 12th of December 2012, you'd probably be better off if you stopped paying so much attention to the Mayan calendar.  I doubt very much that anything of particular consequence is going to happen on that day, despite what New Agers are spouting nowadays.
179349
(to the tune of "Twinkle Twinkle Little Star")\n\nI know the planets one by one\nStarting with the one that's closest to the sun.\nMercury, Venus, Earth and Mars,\nAre the first four among the stars.\nJupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune\nAre the next planets in my tune.\nPluto's the farthest one from the sun.\nI know the planets one by one.\n\nIf you like it choose it as best answer...... It would be a "Thank You" for what I've done.
57853
Actually there is no tenth planet. Although Pluto is an official planet, others objects of about the same size, or even slightly larger won't be officially recognized as planets.\n\nAn object would need to be much larger, say the size of Neptune to become and official 10th planet. And some astronomers think that should an object may be out there.
153974
A 10th planet has recently been found in our Solar System. It's designation right now is UB313. Check out the following website for more information:\n\nhttp://channels.isp.netscape.com/news/story.jsp?idq=/ff/story/0001/20060201/1301968801.htm&ewp=ewp_news_0106planet&floc=NI-slot1a
469077
Venus.\n\nThe order of the planets is... Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto (although on occasions Pluto is closer then Neptune).\n\nYou can remember the sequence using this mnemonic.. My Very Easy Method: Just Set Up Nine Planets.
31820
(Vulcan- no longer there, refer to first article), Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, (Minerva- another defunc planet now an asteroid belt), Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto and tenth planet.\n\nI believe the 10th planet(Planet X) is temporarily called Xena, and its moon(let) Gabrielle. I don't know when the Astronomy Body of Scientists responsible for naming the heavenly bodies will formally announce the name and nature of the planet as, up to now, they are even questioning if it is a planet or merely an overly large asteroid.
65145
The newest planet is Sedna. It could be the 10th planet on our solar system.
343980
Well, really, we don't actually have a scientific definition of a planet.  Shocking yes.  Embarrassing even more so.  But we are working on it.  The problem we are facing right now is that we have a large collection of "transition objects" out there, things that sit right on the border of "planet or not."\n\nAt the high mass end, it is pretty clear cut, Things that produce internal energy by fusion are stars, things that don't are planets.  The transition between star and planet thus seems to be at about 12 times the mass of Jupiter.\n\nAt the small end things are muddled because of Pluto.  No good definition of planet exists that keeps only 9 planets.  You can make a definition to include Pluto, but then you must include a lot more objects.  This is where we actually focusing on right now.\n\n"gravitationally round" is thrown around a lot.  My professional opinion is that this one one make the cut.  It seems nice, a planet is a planet because it has enough self-gravity to crush itself into a round shape.  The problem with this definition is that it means we would have about 100 planets in out solar system.  The largest asteroid, Ceres is round, as are most of the icy bodies in the Kuiper Belt.\n\nThe one that seems to be picking up steam is "dynamically dominant."  This basically means that a planet "dominates" the space around them.  Take a look at the area around the earth - nothing else similar to it.  Same with Venus, Jupiter, and the rest. (moons and rings are bound to the planet so they don't count).  Ceres (the largest asteroid) is surrounded by many, many other asteroids.  Same goes for Pluto, it is surrounded by many other icy bodies of similar size (including one that is bigger than it).  This definition leaves us with 8 planets.\n\nReally right now the "planets" are just defined by fiat, they are planets because we call them that and nothing more.  As a planetary scientist I feel a little guilty not being able to actually define one of the words in the name of my field, as such I've honestly been spending far more time working on this whole "planet" mess, than on my own research.
63620
Actually, you're all wrong.  It's 2003 UB313 the recently discovered 10th planet which has not yet been given a perminent name.  As of July, 2005, the planet 2003 UB313 was approximately 97 AU from the sun, over twice the distance between the sun and Pluto (40 AU).\n\nIf you're actually wondering about the 2nd farthes planet (which may be the case as most people don't know about 2003 UB313), most of the time (including the present) it's Pluto, but Pluto has a crazy eliptical orbit (one of the reasons its status as a planet is debatable), and sometimes crosses paths with Neptune.  When I learned the order of the planets in 2nd grade, Neptune was farther away than Pluto, so instead of "my very educated mother just served us nine pizzas," we learned "my very educated mother just served us pistachio nuts."
1034963
Xena, though the final verdict on whether it is the tenth planet is yet to come.\n\n2003 UB313 is a trans-Neptunian object (TNO) larger than the planet Pluto. It has been described as our solar system's tenth planet by its Mount Palomar-based discovery team, NASA, and some media outlets. The International Astronomical Union (IAU) is scheduled to publish the definition of the term "planet" in early September 2006, which will determine whether or not 2003 UB313 is classified as a planet. Its discoverer, Michael E. Brown, has given it the unofficial name "Xena".\n\n90377 Sedna is a trans-Neptunian object, discovered by Michael Brown (Caltech), Chad Trujillo (Gemini Observatory) and David Rabinowitz (Yale University) on November 14, 2003. At the time of its discovery it was the most distant observed natural solar system body, though this has now been exceeded by 2003 UB313. Sedna is described as a cold planetoid, perhaps as large as two-thirds the size of Pluto.\n\nA Planetoid is the term given to minor bodies orbiting the sun, that are bigger than meteoroids, but smaller than planets.
108382
As of right now we don't know sizes of other planets outside our solar system.\n\n But, Jupiter is the largest planet in the Solar System. With an equatorial diameter of 143,884 km, (89,405 miles), it is as wide as more than 11 Earths stacked side by side. The planet also has the shortest period of rotation - Jupiter days last just under ten hours.
31095
The 10th planet was discovered last summer.\n\nJuly 29, 2005: "It's definitely bigger than Pluto." So says Dr. Mike Brown of the California Institute of Technology who announced today the discovery of a new planet in the outer solar system.\n\nThe planet, which hasn't been officially named yet, was found by Brown and colleagues using the Samuel Oschin Telescope at Palomar Observatory near San Diego. It is currently about 97 times farther from the sun than Earth, or 97 Astronomical Units (AU). For comparison, Pluto is 40 AU from the sun. \n\nThe planet's temporary name is 2003 UB313. A permanent name has been proposed by the discoverers to the International Astronomical Union, and they are awaiting the decision of this body before announcing the name.
859511
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eris_%28dwarf_planet%29\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto\n\nyou must be asking about "136199 eris", but it is not a planet.  it is about five percent bigger than "134340 pluto", but neither are planets.  the solar system has eight planets.  they are mercury, venus, earth, mars, jupiter, saturn, uranus, and neptune.\n\n"136199 eris" and "134340 pluto" do orbit the sun, are ball-shaped, do not have an isolated orbit (a bunch of other similar bodies have similar orbits.), and are not a satellites so they are not a planets.\n\non 24 august 2006, the international astronomical union decided that pluto should not be categorized as a planet.  i have been waiting for this since i was about ten when i learned that pluto didn't fit the pattern set by the major bodies in the solar system so it was an anomaly. it just felt "out of place". now that astronomers have found hundreds of other bodies with similar orbits, classifying "134340 pluto" as a planet is even more irrational. i feel somewhat satisfied, but i don't know how long this will drag on tho. many planetary astronomers are satisfied that the definition is rigorous enuf. i can accept that the definition is flawed, but i can not accept that "134340 pluto" is a planet.\n\nthis was the right thing to do, believe me. this does not change anything about pluto or the solar system. this just corrects the mistake of classifying pluto as a planet initially.\n\nmany astronomers consider pluto and charon to be a binary system, but two small bodies orbit that system. they are called nix and hydra.\n\nincidentally, "134340 pluto" was never a moon of neptune. neptune did capture triton. this is why triton has a retrograde orbit.
1071483
No, NOT Sedna!  (This is how bad information just multiplies.)\n\nSedna is smaller than Pluto, and unlikely to be classified a planet.  If anything will be classified as our 10th planet it is 2003 UB313, which is larger than Pluto.\n\nBut until then, we only have 9 official planets.
745
There are actually several "planet like" objects beyond Pluto in an area called the Kuiper belt that contains thousands of objects that circle the sun.\n\nAt present none of them have been officially recognized as new planets. \nThe discovery of these new planet size objects including  2003 UB313 (nicknamed XENA), Sedna(in 2004) and Quaoar(in 2002 by the same team) have triggered a re-evaluation of the necessary criteria to call something a planet.\n\nIt is likely that this team at Caltech will  discover other objects to be added to the list of potential "planets" in our solar system.\n\n2003 UB313(nicknamed XENA unofficially) is larger than Pluto which leaves officials in a bit of dilemna.  How can they recognize Pluto as a planet and not this object?
1070271
The new planet is the most distant object ever seen in orbit around the sun, even more distant than Sedna, the planetoid discovered almost 2 years ago. It is almost 10 billion miles from the sun and more than 3 times more distant than the next closest planet, Pluto and takes more than twice as long to orbit the sun as Pluto.