The thing about science is it has always practiced detachment from culture, whether it be on religious or superstitious grounds. Scientists might name objects based on cultural items, but the rules of science mean classification schemes cannot be based on arbitrary measures or public sentimentality. Things need precise definitions, or the systems by which objects are classified will not be consistent.
I understand why Pluto's demotion upset the public. At first I was baffled by the apparent nitpicking of astronomers. But now I realize how useful the debate is to science, astronomy, and even the general public. It's important because Pluto behaved in ways that didn't entirely fit any term in the astronomy dictionary. In some ways it resembled a comet, being made of ice and not having a stable orbit; in other ways it resembled a planet, being large, round, and having a nearly circular orbit. It also had moons, which was something only planets were thought to have.
However, once it was found that some asteroids had moons, and that there were similar icy objects farther away in the Kuiper Belt (some which rival Pluto in size), it became apparent that Pluto resembled something in an entirely different class of objects (Tyson). The IAU decided on calling these dwarf planets, or plutonian objects. Why the IAU decided on "dwarf planet" to describe something that isn't really a planet is something that also baffles me, as it doesn't really help clarify the new classification scheme. I mean, isn't a dwarf star still a star?
It goes to show how science and culture often distort each other. The demotion of Pluto didn't make it any less significant as a celestial object. Nor did calling it a dwarf planet make up for the cultural backlash. People did not need to perceive it as a demotion either; it was simply reclassified, as many things are in science. The whole thing is a wonderful example of science doing what science does: challenging public perception and our ideas of conventional thought.
Tyson, Neil deGrasse. "Pluto's Honor." Natural History magazine. February 1999. Retrieved from https://www.haydenplanetarium.org/tyson/essays/1999-02-plutos-honor.php
No comments:
Post a Comment