Is pluto really a planet?
145121
no. The majority of scientists define the main requirement of a planet to be it's gravatational domination of it's surroundings; something pluto and 2003 UB313 do not do; in fact, both Pluto and 2003 UB313 aren't even the size of earth's moon. The main reason there is even controversy on this topic is because Americans were the ones who discovered Puto and the other icy rock and wanted to have some kind of historical placement in the field of Astronomy.
373101
There is debate over whether Pluto should even be classified as a planet.  It seems out of place with the gas giants of the outer solar system beyond the rock belt.  Also, other similar bodies are being found beyond Pluto that are not being made "planets".  Finally, Pluto has a satellite, or "moon", Charon, which is actually almost as big as Pluto istelf, and orbits very, very close to Pluto.  From Earth, they barely resolve (depending on the quality of the instrument) and appear joined at the hip as it were.  Pluto takes 248 years to orbit the sun.  Since it was discovered in 1930, man has not even observed one of its completed orbits around the sun.  Pluto follows an extremely exaggerated elliptical orbit, which actually crosses paths with the orbit of Neptune.  Thus, sometimes Neptune is the furthest planet from the sun, other times it is Pluto.\n\nUranus rotates about its own axis which is "sideways" (a relative term), at 98 degrees tilt.\n\nNeptune has a Great Dark Spot, which is a storm similar to the Great Red Spot of Jupiter.
927189
To answer your second question first (I'm just an ornery cuss), Pluto is still a member of the Solar System. It's no longer considered a planet, though. It is now called a dwarf planet because of its size and extremely anomalous orbit (so look it up already).Just like the moon. asteroids, etc. it is still part of the Solar System.\n\nAs to the 1st part of your question-------Usually, as long as Mickey gives him table scraps instead of that crap from the can.Woof!Woof!
822336
read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto\n\ni don't know what you mean by "special", but pluto does orbit the sun, is ball-shaped, does not have an isolated orbit (a bunch of other similar bodies have similar orbits.), and is not a satellite so it is not a planet.\n\ni have been waiting for this since i was about ten.  i knew 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.  this 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.
1131127
No.\n\nIts likely even that Pluto will be relegated to being a Kuiper belt object rather than a plnet, leaving just 8.\n\nKuiper belt objects are regularly discovered.
782519
read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto\n\nno, pluto does orbit the sun, is ball-shaped, does not have an isolated orbit (a bunch of other similar bodies have similar orbits.), and is not a satellite so it is not a planet.\n\ni 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.
288851
Pluto is more likely to be a KBO, or a Kuiper Belt Object. By this theory it's been around since the solar system began. There are other objects in this area of space that equal the size of Pluto.
89889
July 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\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. \nAm I right U_EVERYONE_K
103893
Pluto is officially a planet. Although if it were discovered today it would almost certainly NOT get planet status.\n\nBecause of all the confusion with the recent spate of Kuiper Belt Objects, the International Astronomical Union (they are in charge of naming stuff) declared Pluto a planet for historical reasons.\n\nOf course, for astronomical research it doesn't matter too much what you call it...
327202
The last time I checked there were still 9 planets and they were considering maybe adding a 10th. Pluto is a planet with a moon of it's own named Charon. Astronomers have also identified a couple of other large bodies orbiting beyond Pluto. It has been suggested that there could be two planetoids beyond Pluto that revolve around each other.
785248
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto\nhttp://www.iau.org/fileadmin/content/pdfs/Resolution_GA26-5-6.pdf\n\non 24 august 2006, the international astronomical union reclassified pluto.\n\npluto does orbit the sun, is ball-shaped and is not a satellite, but it does not have an isolated orbit (a bunch of other similar bodies have similar orbits.) so it is not a planet.\n\ni 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\nthis same thing happened has happened before.  in 1800, an astronomer found a body orbiting the sun between the orbits of mars and jupiter and thought it was a planet.  astronomers finally stopped classifying them as planets after they found several other bodies with similar orbits, and no one thinks ceres, pallas, juno, and vesta are planets today.\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
913474
Yes most astrologers do recognize Pluto as a planet. its effects has been tracked, while maybe not as powerfull in a person's chart as the first couple of planets. it is still there, in the sky and moving. if astrologers only used the planets, Leo and Cancer would be without a ruling planet, as the moon and sun are not planets, and we would not see Asteroids in some charts.\n\nAs for Eris, its a newly found planet, it took years to track Pluto's Effects. so give it a little time before its Effects are widely known and Astrologers begin using it in their charts.
1178690
Right now the international convention in astronomy is debating on how a planet is defined... Pluto appears to be just one of the thousands of objects in the Kuiper belt which is believed to contain objects more massive than Pluto, 2003 ub313 is one prime example and is classified as a Trans-Neptunian object... I have already debated this topic with all the other webdatedotcom friends I have and the arguments are pretty interesting..
392063
It's smaller then Pluto, so I would say no.  There's quite a bit of debate right now as to whether or not Pluto even counts as a planet, but the International Astronomical Union (IAU) has, for now at least, kept Pluto as a planet.  Anything smaller then Pluto (like Sedna) would not be considered a planet.  Of course, that leaves the status of that other new object, UB313, up for grabs.
335341
Wow, just asked my 10year old same question.  He said it is a planet they have recently discovered about twice the distance of Pluto.
1032173
Depends on how long ago you were in school -- Pluto is so far away that for many years we thought it was larger than it has turned out to, in fact, be.\n\nThe most recent value I have for the diameter of the two planets is:\nMercury = 4879.4 km\nPluto = 2302 km\n\nThen, of course, there's the debate about whether or not Pluto is even truly a planet . . .
900432
Pluto was discovered by Clyde Tombaugh in 1930 at the Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, AZ. (Not far from where I live.) It was named after the mythological Roman deity believed to rule the underworld. The 1st 2 letters of its name, "PL", are also the initials of astronomer Percival Lowell.\nFor many years, it was considered the 9th planet in our solar system, but recently lost that status. Personally, I think it's a shame. I'll always think of it as a planet.\nHere's a couple of links you can follow to learn more.