Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

[mpml] An existing poll has been modified, check it out.

Expand Messages
  • mpml@yahoogroups.com
    Enter your vote now! https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mpml/polls/poll/4721658 I wonder to ask about usage of MPC circulars
    Message 1 of 20 , May 30, 2017
      I wonder to ask about usage of MPC circulars (http://minorplanetcenter.net/iau/ECS/MPCArchive/MPCArchive_TBL.html)
      Created by: pieroturrini
      1. Do you seldom read them? (added by: pieroturrini . May 30, 2017)


      Thanks!

    • mpml@yahoogroups.com
      Enter your vote now! https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mpml/polls/poll/4721658 I wonder to ask about usage of MPC circulars
      Message 2 of 20 , May 30, 2017
        I wonder to ask about usage of MPC circulars (http://minorplanetcenter.net/iau/ECS/MPCArchive/MPCArchive_TBL.html)
        Created by: pieroturrini
        1. Do you seldom read them? (added by: pieroturrini . May 30, 2017)


        Thanks!

      • P. Clay Sherrod
        Why am I (and I assume others) getting multiple sending s of this same message? My count is up to 11 of the same message. Also, is a poll not just a bit
        Message 3 of 20 , May 30, 2017
          
          Why am I (and I assume others) getting multiple sending's of this same message?  My count is up to 11 of the same message.  Also, is a "poll" not just a bit skewed toward the negative is the ONLY question asked is "Do you seldom read them?"...what other options do we have?
          ------------
          Dr. Clay
           
          Arkansas Sky Observatories
          WEB:  www.arksky.org/
          FACEBOOK:  https://www.facebook.com/groups/421163751426836/
          [Latest books from Dr. Clay at: http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/Stardoc44 ]
          ASO Petit Jean Mountain /MPC H41
          ASO Petit Jean Mountain South /MPC H45
          ASO West Conway /MPC H43
          .......serving astronomy since 1971
          ____________________
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 9:34 AM
          Subject: {MPML} [mpml] An existing poll has been modified, check it out.

          I wonder to ask about usage of MPC circulars (http://minorplanetcenter.net/iau/ECS/MPCArchive/MPCArchive_TBL.html)
          Created by: pieroturrini
          1. Do you seldom read them? (added by: pieroturrini . May 30, 2017)


          Thanks!

        • mpml@yahoogroups.com
          Enter your vote now! https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mpml/polls/poll/4721658 I wonder to ask about usage of MPC circulars
          Message 4 of 20 , May 30, 2017
            I wonder to ask about usage of MPC circulars (http://minorplanetcenter.net/iau/ECS/MPCArchive/MPCArchive_TBL.html)
            Created by: pieroturrini
            1. Please remove Pluto and all dwarf planets from the MPC. They are NOT "minor planets." (added by: laurelkornfeld . May 30, 2017)


            Thanks!

          • Jean Meeus
            Oh no!!! Please keep Ceres, Pluto etc. There are minor planets and they have asteroid numbers. Jean Meeus
            Message 5 of 20 , May 30, 2017
              Oh no!!!
              Please keep Ceres, Pluto etc. There are minor planets and they have asteroid numbers.

              Jean Meeus


              On 30 May 2017 at 18:25, <mpml@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
               

              I wonder to ask about usage of MPC circulars (http://minorplanetcenter.net/ iau/ECS/MPCArchive/MPCArchive_ TBL.html)
              Created by: pieroturrini
              1. Please remove Pluto and all dwarf planets from the MPC. They are NOT "minor planets." (added by: laurelkornfeld . May 30, 2017)


              Thanks!


            • Bill Gray
              ... I got an initial version with three questions, followed by several an existing poll has been modified messages, followed by Lauren Kornfeld s question
              Message 6 of 20 , May 30, 2017
                On 2017-05-30 10:56, 'P. Clay Sherrod' drclay@... [mpml] wrote:
                > Why am I (and I assume others) getting multiple sendings of this same > message? My count is up to 11 of the same message.

                I got an initial version with three questions, followed by several
                "an existing poll has been modified" messages, followed by Lauren
                Kornfeld's question about removing Pluto and other "dwarf planets".
                Can't say I'd see much point in doing a poll on any of them, though
                any of the questions would be reasonably suited for on-list discussion.

                I guess I'll throw this out to start the discussion...

                The most recent batch of MPCs,

                http://www.minorplanetcenter.net/iau/ECS/MPCArchive/2017/MPC_20170510.pdf

                has a series of interesting plot twists over its 950 pages (I admit
                I didn't read every page). The action starts off on the first page,
                though, with the revelation that 54,067 DECam observations had timing
                errors and are being deleted. Yet another reminder to check your timing,
                and to not just say "I ran ntp or Dimension4, and I trust the software
                to write the time of mid-exposure to the image". I'll bet the computers
                used with DECam had clocks set to the correct time to within a fraction
                of a second, and software that wrote out something Just Plain Capital-R
                Rong to the image header.

                About the only time I look at the MPCs is when I've a question about
                some data and want to look up contact details for the observer. That
                happens maybe once a year or so.

                I look at the MPECs much more frequently, usually using this index :

                https://www.projectpluto.com/mpecs/2017.htm#the_end

                which is a little more suited to my workflow than the index provided
                by MPC.

                In re MPC handling of Pluto and dwarf planets: despite the name,
                MPC also collects data on comets, natural satellites, and some
                artsats. I see no good reason to set up a separate center (or centers)
                for each (somewhat arbitrary) category of object. The data processing
                involved is broadly similar. Asteroids sometimes turn out to be comets,
                and there are objects on the borderline between asteroid and dwarf
                planet, so the "Minor Planets-only Center" would be handing objects
                back and forth to the "Comet Center" and "Dwarf Planet Center".

                If you wish to hash out the what's-a-planet, what's-a-dwarf-planet,
                etc. issues, that's fine; but please look for ways to do so that do
                not result in needless duplication of effort, or leave data with no
                central body to organize it.

                -- Bill
              • laurelkornfeld@netzero.com
                As David Weintraub noted in his book Is Pluto A Planet, the term minor planet has been a synonym for asteroids, comets, and other objects not large enough to
                Message 7 of 20 , May 30, 2017
                  As David Weintraub noted in his book Is Pluto A Planet, the term "minor planet" has been a synonym for asteroids, comets, and other objects not large enough to be in hydrostatic equilibrium for 150 years. It refers to those objects the IAU now classes as "Small Solar System Bodies." Dwarf planets should not be in this category. None of the existing dwarf planets are borderline objects. The only reason dwarf planets were put under the MPC auspices is because of the persistent efforts of the late Brian Marsden.
                   
                  Laurel

                  ---------- Original Message ----------
                  From: "Bill Gray pluto@... [mpml]" <mpml-noreply@yahoogroups.com>
                  To: "P. Clay Sherrod" <drclay@...>, mpml@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: {MPML} [mpml] An existing poll has been modified, check it out.
                  Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 16:22:23 -0400

                   

                  On 2017-05-30 10:56, 'P. Clay Sherrod' drclay@... [mpml] wrote:
                  > Why am I (and I assume others) getting multiple sendings of this same > message? My count is up to 11 of the same message.

                  I got an initial version with three questions, followed by several
                  "an existing poll has been modified" messages, followed by Lauren
                  Kornfeld's question about removing Pluto and other "dwarf planets".
                  Can't say I'd see much point in doing a poll on any of them, though
                  any of the questions would be reasonably suited for on-list discussion.

                  I guess I'll throw this out to start the discussion...

                  The most recent batch of MPCs,

                  http://www.minorplanetcenter.net/iau/ECS/MPCArchive/2017/MPC_20170510.pdf

                  has a series of interesting plot twists over its 950 pages (I admit
                  I didn't read every page). The action starts off on the first page,
                  though, with the revelation that 54,067 DECam observations had timing
                  errors and are being deleted. Yet another reminder to check your timing,
                  and to not just say "I ran ntp or Dimension4, and I trust the software
                  to write the time of mid-exposure to the image". I'll bet the computers
                  used with DECam had clocks set to the correct time to within a fraction
                  of a second, and software that wrote out something Just Plain Capital-R
                  Rong to the image header.

                  About the only time I look at the MPCs is when I've a question about
                  some data and want to look up contact details for the observer. That
                  happens maybe once a year or so.

                  I look at the MPECs much more frequently, usually using this index :

                  https://www.projectpluto.com/mpecs/2017.htm#the_end

                  which is a little more suited to my workflow than the index provided
                  by MPC.

                  In re MPC handling of Pluto and dwarf planets: despite the name,
                  MPC also collects data on comets, natural satellites, and some
                  artsats. I see no good reason to set up a separate center (or centers)
                  for each (somewhat arbitrary) category of object. The data processing
                  involved is broadly similar. Asteroids sometimes turn out to be comets,
                  and there are objects on the borderline between asteroid and dwarf
                  planet, so the "Minor Planets-only Center" would be handing objects
                  back and forth to the "Comet Center" and "Dwarf Planet Center".

                  If you wish to hash out the what's-a-planet, what's-a-dwarf-planet,
                  etc. issues, that's fine; but please look for ways to do so that do
                  not result in needless duplication of effort, or leave data with no
                  central body to organize it.

                  -- Bill

                   



                  ____________________________________________________________
                  Why Do You Have Bloating? Watch This Video For The Truth
                  Gut Health Research
                  http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3242/592e23335c6ad23335906st03duc
                  SponsoredBy Content.Ad
                • mpml@yahoogroups.com
                  Enter your vote now! https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mpml/polls/poll/4721658 I wonder to ask about usage of MPC circulars
                  Message 8 of 20 , May 31, 2017
                    I wonder to ask about usage of MPC circulars (http://minorplanetcenter.net/iau/ECS/MPCArchive/MPCArchive_TBL.html)
                    Created by: pieroturrini
                    1. Do you get upset when there is a month without an MPC? (added by: zthidkdm . May 31, 2017)


                    Thanks!

                  • mpml@yahoogroups.com
                    Enter your vote now! https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/mpml/polls/poll/4721658 I wonder to ask about usage of MPC circulars
                    Message 9 of 20 , May 31, 2017
                      I wonder to ask about usage of MPC circulars (http://minorplanetcenter.net/iau/ECS/MPCArchive/MPCArchive_TBL.html)
                      Created by: pieroturrini
                      1. No (added by: laurelkornfeld . May 31, 2017)


                      Thanks!

                    • Dave Herald
                      To the moderator: Can you please delete/remove this poll. Up until now I have refrained from looking at it. But having now looked at it, it is apparent that it
                      Message 10 of 20 , May 31, 2017
                        To the moderator:
                         
                        Can you please delete/remove this poll. Up until now I have refrained from looking at it. But having now looked at it, it is apparent that it has been extremely poorly designed – such that any results will be absolutely meaningless.
                         
                        Specifically, the natural response to each question is a binary response – either Yes or No. Yet the poll structure does not allow a Yes or No answer – so the significance of the responses actually given is doubtful at best. IMHO, the set of questions should have been prefaced with the instruction of:
                        - check each statement you agree with.
                         
                        A more general issue IMHO is the ability of anyone to put forward a survey – irrespective of their level of knowledge etc about the role and functioning of the group & the MPC. The MPML group is a long-establhed mature group with generally a high level of understanding around minor planet issues. As a result, IMHO it would be appropriate to exclude anyone who has not been a member of the group for 12 months or so (or made more than 30 posting?) from putting forward such a survey. However I suspect that is not easily done.
                         
                        Yet again we have someone pushing the Pluto issue. I would be prepared to get involved in such a debate if, as a preliminary, someone could provide a clear and unambiguous distinction between a stone and a rock – such that everyone could unambiguously state that something in the nature of a rock or stone was always (and without doubt) one or the other but not both. Once you realise that this is not possible (as far as I’m aware)! you might appreciate that the Pluto issue is fundamentally not a distinction based on scientific rigour. Rather it is a linguistic distinction driven by a variety of peripheral issues.
                         
                        Finally, I was tempted to add another question to the poll – ‘I think this Poll is a waste of time’. But that would be self-fulfilling.
                         
                         
                         
                        Dave Herald
                        Murrumbateman

                         
                        Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2017 2:46 AM
                        Subject: {MPML} [mpml] An existing poll has been modified, check it out.
                         


                        I wonder to ask about usage of MPC circulars (http://minorplanetcenter.net/iau/ECS/MPCArchive/MPCArchive_TBL.html)
                        Created by: pieroturrini
                        1. No (added by: laurelkornfeld . May 31, 2017)


                        Thanks!

                      • P. Clay Sherrod
                        I think this suggestion is warranted, just from the standpoint that whatever this poll is, we are seeing fragments of answers for questions that are not even
                        Message 11 of 20 , May 31, 2017
                          
                          I think this suggestion is warranted, just from the standpoint that whatever this "poll" is, we are seeing fragments of answers for questions that are not even presented as they would be in a true poll.  What/where are the questions?  Who was invited to participate?  What are the fragmented answers that we are seeing?  Why is there a poll for Pluto or even any discussion on this....we have beat this old horse to death and there is no sense whatsoever to bring it up again.  And - for the record - it was not Marsden who pushed for the downgrade of Pluto to dwarf planet status - he had already left the IAU meeting that year and the proposal came up out of a group of rookie astronomers to the IAU who wanted to make their mark on the world after the veterans had left all this just as it was.
                           
                          At any rate, to keep seeing "answers" to unknown questions from an invisible "poll" is ludicrous for this forum I believe, particularly the subject matter that I am seeing remarks posted towards.
                           
                          ------------
                          Dr. Clay
                           
                          Arkansas Sky Observatories
                          WEB:  www.arksky.org/
                          FACEBOOK:  https://www.facebook.com/groups/421163751426836/
                          [Latest books from Dr. Clay at: http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/Stardoc44 ]
                          ASO Petit Jean Mountain /MPC H41
                          ASO Petit Jean Mountain South /MPC H45
                          ASO West Conway /MPC H43
                          .......serving astronomy since 1971
                          ____________________
                          ----- Original Message -----
                          Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 4:14 PM
                          Subject: Re: {MPML} [mpml] An existing poll has been modified, check it out.

                          To the moderator:
                           
                          Can you please delete/remove this poll. Up until now I have refrained from looking at it. But having now looked at it, it is apparent that it has been extremely poorly designed – such that any results will be absolutely meaningless.
                           
                          Specifically, the natural response to each question is a binary response – either Yes or No. Yet the poll structure does not allow a Yes or No answer – so the significance of the responses actually given is doubtful at best. IMHO, the set of questions should have been prefaced with the instruction of:
                          - check each statement you agree with.
                           
                          A more general issue IMHO is the ability of anyone to put forward a survey – irrespective of their level of knowledge etc about the role and functioning of the group & the MPC. The MPML group is a long-establhed mature group with generally a high level of understanding around minor planet issues. As a result, IMHO it would be appropriate to exclude anyone who has not been a member of the group for 12 months or so (or made more than 30 posting?) from putting forward such a survey. However I suspect that is not easily done.
                           
                          Yet again we have someone pushing the Pluto issue. I would be prepared to get involved in such a debate if, as a preliminary, someone could provide a clear and unambiguous distinction between a stone and a rock – such that everyone could unambiguously state that something in the nature of a rock or stone was always (and without doubt) one or the other but not both. Once you realise that this is not possible (as far as I’m aware)! you might appreciate that the Pluto issue is fundamentally not a distinction based on scientific rigour. Rather it is a linguistic distinction driven by a variety of peripheral issues.
                           
                          Finally, I was tempted to add another question to the poll – ‘I think this Poll is a waste of time’. But that would be self-fulfilling.
                           
                           
                           
                          Dave Herald
                          Murrumbateman

                           
                          Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2017 2:46 AM
                          Subject: {MPML} [mpml] An existing poll has been modified, check it out.
                           


                          I wonder to ask about usage of MPC circulars (http://minorplanetcenter.net/iau/ECS/MPCArchive/MPCArchive_TBL.html)
                          Created by: pieroturrini
                          1. No (added by: laurelkornfeld . May 31, 2017)


                          Thanks!

                        • Dave Tholen
                          ... Are you referring to the 2006 General Assembly in Prague? My recollection is that Marsden was there at the Closing General Assembly, participating in the
                          Message 12 of 20 , May 31, 2017
                            > And - for the record - it was not Marsden who pushed for the downgrade
                            > of Pluto to dwarf planet status - he had already left the IAU meeting
                            > that year

                            Are you referring to the 2006 General Assembly in Prague? My recollection
                            is that Marsden was there at the Closing General Assembly, participating
                            in the vote as I was. But by then there were plenty of others arguing
                            both sides of the case. It certainly wasn't a one-man show.
                          • P. Clay Sherrod
                            In a communication from Brian, I have been under the impression that he and many others were on their way back to their respective homes when this was put out
                            Message 13 of 20 , May 31, 2017
                              In a communication from Brian, I have been under the impression that he and many
                              others were on their way back to their respective homes when this was put out on the
                              table anew; he was totally surprised when he got back and learned that the discussion
                              had resurfaced. He laughingly called it a "grad student revolution."
                              ------------
                              Clay

                              Arkansas Sky Observatories
                              WEB: www.arksky.org/
                              FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/groups/421163751426836/
                              [Latest books from Dr. Clay at: http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/Stardoc44 ]
                              ASO Petit Jean Mountain /MPC H41
                              ASO Petit Jean Mountain South /MPC H45
                              ASO West Conway /MPC H43
                              .......serving astronomy since 1971
                              ____________________
                              ----- Original Message -----
                              From: "Dave Tholen" <tholen@...>
                              To: <drclay@...>; <drherald@...>; <mpml@yahoogroups.com>
                              Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 5:50 PM
                              Subject: Re: {MPML} [mpml] An existing poll has been modified, check it out.


                              >> And - for the record - it was not Marsden who pushed for the downgrade
                              >> of Pluto to dwarf planet status - he had already left the IAU meeting
                              >> that year
                              >
                              > Are you referring to the 2006 General Assembly in Prague? My recollection
                              > is that Marsden was there at the Closing General Assembly, participating
                              > in the vote as I was. But by then there were plenty of others arguing
                              > both sides of the case. It certainly wasn't a one-man show.
                            • laurelkornfeld@netzero.com
                              In his book The Case for Pluto, science writer Alan Boyle notes this was a long-term goal for Marsden. I don t know whether or not the decision was made by
                              Message 14 of 20 , May 31, 2017
                                In his book The Case for Pluto, science writer Alan Boyle notes this was a long-term goal for Marsden. I don't know whether or not the decision was made by graduate students, but it is public knowledge that most who voted at that meeting were not planetary scientists but other types of astronomers. There are probably better ways to honor Marden than a flawed classification. He already has an asteroid and group of Sun-grazing comets named for him.
                                 
                                Laurel

                                ---------- Original Message ----------
                                From: "'P. Clay Sherrod' drclay@... [mpml]" <mpml-noreply@yahoogroups.com>
                                To: "Dave Tholen" <tholen@...>, <drherald@...>, <mpml@yahoogroups.com>
                                Subject: Re: {MPML} [mpml] An existing poll has been modified, check it out.
                                Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 18:04:25 -0500

                                 

                                In a communication from Brian, I have been under the impression that he and many
                                others were on their way back to their respective homes when this was put out on the
                                table anew; he was totally surprised when he got back and learned that the discussion
                                had resurfaced. He laughingly called it a "grad student revolution."
                                ------------
                                Clay

                                Arkansas Sky Observatories
                                WEB: www.arksky.org/
                                FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/groups/421163751426836/
                                [Latest books from Dr. Clay at: http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/Stardoc44 ]
                                ASO Petit Jean Mountain /MPC H41
                                ASO Petit Jean Mountain South /MPC H45
                                ASO West Conway /MPC H43
                                .......serving astronomy since 1971
                                ____________________

                                ----- Original Message -----
                                From: "Dave Tholen" <tholen@...>
                                To: <drclay@...>; <drherald@...>; <mpml@yahoogroups.com>
                                Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 5:50 PM
                                Subject: Re: {MPML} [mpml] An existing poll has been modified, check it out.

                                >> And - for the record - it was not Marsden who pushed for the downgrade
                                >> of Pluto to dwarf planet status - he had already left the IAU meeting
                                >> that year
                                >
                                > Are you referring to the 2006 General Assembly in Prague? My recollection
                                > is that Marsden was there at the Closing General Assembly, participating
                                > in the vote as I was. But by then there were plenty of others arguing
                                > both sides of the case. It certainly wasn't a one-man show.

                                 



                                ____________________________________________________________
                                3 Common Foods Surgeons Are Now Calling "Death Foods"
                                3 Harmful Foods
                                http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3242/592f4dba5c64f4dba24a5st02duc
                                SponsoredBy Content.Ad
                              • Alan Harris
                                If Brian had left the meeting it was his own knowing choice, there was no revolution involved in the voting at the closing General Assembly. As Dave Tholen,
                                Message 15 of 20 , May 31, 2017
                                  If Brian had left the meeting it was his own knowing choice, there was
                                  no "revolution" involved in the voting at the closing General Assembly.
                                  As Dave Tholen, I was there, and even have my yellow "voting card"
                                  preserved as a souvenir of the occasion. The format of the General
                                  Assembly is an opening session, on the first day, which is mostly
                                  ceremonial and recreational (musical and dance performances by the host
                                  country, etc.), but with some "business" conducted. In the week or ten
                                  days that follow, administrative groups draft and put forth resolutions
                                  that are discussed in various sub-group (Division or Commission)
                                  meetings. In the final days, these drafts are posted to the membership
                                  for an further comment and notification of final voting. Normally,
                                  these are non-contentious and are passed at the closing General Assembly
                                  by near-unanimous voice vote. Knowing that the whole Pluto matter would
                                  be contentious, for the first time ever, I believe, voting cards were
                                  distributed as we entered the session to those qualified to vote (full
                                  members of the IAU, identified by blue bordered badges with the word
                                  "Member" on them. The Pluto issue was in fact divided into several
                                  sub-resolutions, the two most important were a resolution defining a new
                                  class of planet, named "dwarf planet", into which Pluto clearly fell,
                                  and then the really contentious one, "a dwarf lanet is not a planet". I
                                  voted yes for the new class "dwarf planet", which I thought was a useful
                                  distinction, but no for the second one, which I thought was semantic
                                  nonsense, like declaring a pine tree is not a tree. If you don't want a
                                  dwarf planet to be a planet, you need another word, a dwarf something
                                  else. Anyway, both passed, which implicitly removed Pluto from planethood.

                                  The person most involved in all this who follows MPML at some level is
                                  Rick Binzel. I believe he made presentations at both the opening and
                                  closing General Assemblies discussing the Pluto and planethood issues,
                                  and contributed to the drafting of the resolutions and sub-resolutions.

                                  Alan

                                  On 5/31/2017 4:04 PM, 'P. Clay Sherrod' drclay@... [mpml] wrote:
                                  > In a communication from Brian, I have been under the impression that he and many
                                  > others were on their way back to their respective homes when this was put out on the
                                  > table anew; he was totally surprised when he got back and learned that the discussion
                                  > had resurfaced. He laughingly called it a "grad student revolution."
                                  > ------------
                                  > Clay
                                  >
                                  > Arkansas Sky Observatories
                                  > WEB: www.arksky.org/
                                  > FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/groups/421163751426836/
                                  > [Latest books from Dr. Clay at: http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/Stardoc44 ]
                                  > ASO Petit Jean Mountain /MPC H41
                                  > ASO Petit Jean Mountain South /MPC H45
                                  > ASO West Conway /MPC H43
                                  > ......serving astronomy since 1971
                                  > ____________________
                                  > ----- Original Message -----
                                  > From: "Dave Tholen" <tholen@...>
                                  > To: <drclay@...>; <drherald@...>; <mpml@yahoogroups.com>
                                  > Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 5:50 PM
                                  > Subject: Re: {MPML} [mpml] An existing poll has been modified, check it out.
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >>> And - for the record - it was not Marsden who pushed for the downgrade
                                  >>> of Pluto to dwarf planet status - he had already left the IAU meeting
                                  >>> that year
                                  >> Are you referring to the 2006 General Assembly in Prague? My recollection
                                  >> is that Marsden was there at the Closing General Assembly, participating
                                  >> in the vote as I was. But by then there were plenty of others arguing
                                  >> both sides of the case. It certainly wasn't a one-man show.
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > ------------------------------------
                                  > Posted by: "P. Clay Sherrod" <drclay@...>
                                  > ------------------------------------
                                  >
                                  > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                                  >
                                  > Posts to this list or information found within may be freely used, with the stipulation that MPML and the originating author are cited as the source of the information.
                                  > ------------------------------------
                                  >
                                  > Yahoo Groups Links
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >

                                  --
                                  Alan Harris harrisaw@...
                                  4603 Orange Knoll Ave. 818-790-8291
                                  La Canada, CA 91011
                                • Thomas Dorman
                                  Please drop this thread it s an old discussion that neither side can win. For the most part believe the poll is flawed and by design to insight there forth the
                                  Message 16 of 20 , May 31, 2017
                                    Please drop this thread it's an old discussion that neither side can win. For the most part believe the poll is flawed and by design to insight there forth the reason we did not answer. Let it go!
                                    Thomas


                                    On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 6:35 PM, "Alan Harris harrisaw@... [mpml]" <mpml-noreply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


                                     
                                    If Brian had left the meeting it was his own knowing choice, there was
                                    no "revolution" involved in the voting at the closing General Assembly.
                                    As Dave Tholen, I was there, and even have my yellow "voting card"
                                    preserved as a souvenir of the occasion. The format of the General
                                    Assembly is an opening session, on the first day, which is mostly
                                    ceremonial and recreational (musical and dance performances by the host
                                    country, etc.), but with some "business" conducted. In the week or ten
                                    days that follow, administrative groups draft and put forth resolutions
                                    that are discussed in various sub-group (Division or Commission)
                                    meetings. In the final days, these drafts are posted to the membership
                                    for an further comment and notification of final voting. Normally,
                                    these are non-contentious and are passed at the closing General Assembly
                                    by near-unanimous voice vote. Knowing that the whole Pluto matter would
                                    be contentious, for the first time ever, I believe, voting cards were
                                    distributed as we entered the session to those qualified to vote (full
                                    members of the IAU, identified by blue bordered badges with the word
                                    "Member" on them. The Pluto issue was in fact divided into several
                                    sub-resolutions, the two most important were a resolution defining a new
                                    class of planet, named "dwarf planet", into which Pluto clearly fell,
                                    and then the really contentious one, "a dwarf lanet is not a planet". I
                                    voted yes for the new class "dwarf planet", which I thought was a useful
                                    distinction, but no for the second one, which I thought was semantic
                                    nonsense, like declaring a pine tree is not a tree. If you don't want a
                                    dwarf planet to be a planet, you need another word, a dwarf something
                                    else. Anyway, both passed, which implicitly removed Pluto from planethood.

                                    The person most involved in all this who follows MPML at some level is
                                    Rick Binzel. I believe he made presentations at both the opening and
                                    closing General Assemblies discussing the Pluto and planethood issues,
                                    and contributed to the drafting of the resolutions and sub-resolutions.

                                    Alan

                                    On 5/31/2017 4:04 PM, 'P. Clay Sherrod' drclay@... [mpml] wrote:
                                    > In a communication from Brian, I have been under the impression that he and many
                                    > others were on their way back to their respective homes when this was put out on the
                                    > table anew; he was totally surprised when he got back and learned that the discussion
                                    > had resurfaced. He laughingly called it a "grad student revolution."
                                    > ------------
                                    > Clay
                                    >
                                    > Arkansas Sky Observatories
                                    > WEB: www.arksky.org/
                                    > FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/groups/421163751426836/
                                    > [Latest books from Dr. Clay at: http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/Stardoc44 ]
                                    > ASO Petit Jean Mountain /MPC H41
                                    > ASO Petit Jean Mountain South /MPC H45
                                    > ASO West Conway /MPC H43
                                    > ......serving astronomy since 1971
                                    > ____________________
                                    > ----- Original Message -----
                                    > From: "Dave Tholen" <tholen@...>
                                    > To: <drclay@...>; <drherald@...>; <mpml@yahoogroups.com>
                                    > Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 5:50 PM
                                    > Subject: Re: {MPML} [mpml] An existing poll has been modified, check it out.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >>> And - for the record - it was not Marsden who pushed for the downgrade
                                    >>> of Pluto to dwarf planet status - he had already left the IAU meeting
                                    >>> that year
                                    >> Are you referring to the 2006 General Assembly in Prague? My recollection
                                    >> is that Marsden was there at the Closing General Assembly, participating
                                    >> in the vote as I was. But by then there were plenty of others arguing
                                    >> both sides of the case. It certainly wasn't a one-man show.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > ------------------------------------
                                    > Posted by: "P. Clay Sherrod" <drclay@...>
                                    > ------------------------------------
                                    >
                                    > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                                    >
                                    > Posts to this list or information found within may be freely used, with the stipulation that MPML and the originating author are cited as the source of the information.
                                    > ------------------------------------
                                    >
                                    > Yahoo Groups Links
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >

                                    --
                                    Alan Harris harrisaw@...
                                    4603 Orange Knoll Ave. 818-790-8291
                                    La Canada, CA 91011



                                  • Dave Herald
                                    Can we all PLEASE let the current discussion of Pluto drop! The concern behind Brian s push to downgrade Pluto was that if size was the determinative factor,
                                    Message 17 of 20 , May 31, 2017
                                      Can we all PLEASE let the current discussion of Pluto drop!

                                      The concern behind Brian's push to downgrade Pluto was that if size was the
                                      determinative factor, the number of 'planets' would grow enormously. In a
                                      context where every schoolkid learns the 9 (8) planets, a list of 30 or 50
                                      takes it out of easy learning for young kids - with whatever flow-on effect
                                      on kids interest in astronomy etc. The unfortunate thing is that the IAU
                                      people addressed the issue as a purely technical issue - trying to dream up
                                      artificial distinctions that might satisfy the end objective. We continue to
                                      have these debates as a result. It is most unfortunate that almost all
                                      involved failed to recognise that the issue involved broad sociological
                                      considerations far more than technical matters; what do the 'ordinary'
                                      people think? End result - a convoluted definition that attempts some form
                                      of logical differentiation that is perpetually open to expressions of
                                      discontent. It is probably the biggest public failure of the IAU - but a
                                      failure of process, not end result (which, as I've previously asserted, is
                                      essentially an arbitrary distinction).

                                      So let this drop, as its going to go nowhere.

                                      Dave Herald
                                      Murrumbateman

                                      -----Original Message-----
                                      From: Alan Harris harrisaw@... [mpml]
                                      Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2017 9:35 AM
                                      To: P. Clay Sherrod ; Dave Tholen ; drherald@... ;
                                      mpml@yahoogroups.com
                                      Cc: Prof. Richard Binzel
                                      Subject: Re: {MPML} [mpml] An existing poll has been modified, check it out.

                                      If Brian had left the meeting it was his own knowing choice, there was
                                      no "revolution" involved in the voting at the closing General Assembly.
                                      As Dave Tholen, I was there, and even have my yellow "voting card"
                                      preserved as a souvenir of the occasion. The format of the General
                                      Assembly is an opening session, on the first day, which is mostly
                                      ceremonial and recreational (musical and dance performances by the host
                                      country, etc.), but with some "business" conducted. In the week or ten
                                      days that follow, administrative groups draft and put forth resolutions
                                      that are discussed in various sub-group (Division or Commission)
                                      meetings. In the final days, these drafts are posted to the membership
                                      for an further comment and notification of final voting. Normally,
                                      these are non-contentious and are passed at the closing General Assembly
                                      by near-unanimous voice vote. Knowing that the whole Pluto matter would
                                      be contentious, for the first time ever, I believe, voting cards were
                                      distributed as we entered the session to those qualified to vote (full
                                      members of the IAU, identified by blue bordered badges with the word
                                      "Member" on them. The Pluto issue was in fact divided into several
                                      sub-resolutions, the two most important were a resolution defining a new
                                      class of planet, named "dwarf planet", into which Pluto clearly fell,
                                      and then the really contentious one, "a dwarf lanet is not a planet". I
                                      voted yes for the new class "dwarf planet", which I thought was a useful
                                      distinction, but no for the second one, which I thought was semantic
                                      nonsense, like declaring a pine tree is not a tree. If you don't want a
                                      dwarf planet to be a planet, you need another word, a dwarf something
                                      else. Anyway, both passed, which implicitly removed Pluto from planethood.

                                      The person most involved in all this who follows MPML at some level is
                                      Rick Binzel. I believe he made presentations at both the opening and
                                      closing General Assemblies discussing the Pluto and planethood issues,
                                      and contributed to the drafting of the resolutions and sub-resolutions.

                                      Alan

                                      On 5/31/2017 4:04 PM, 'P. Clay Sherrod' drclay@... [mpml] wrote:
                                      > In a communication from Brian, I have been under the impression that he
                                      > and many
                                      > others were on their way back to their respective homes when this was put
                                      > out on the
                                      > table anew; he was totally surprised when he got back and learned that the
                                      > discussion
                                      > had resurfaced. He laughingly called it a "grad student revolution."
                                      > ------------
                                      > Clay
                                      >
                                      > Arkansas Sky Observatories
                                      > WEB: www.arksky.org/
                                      > FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/groups/421163751426836/
                                      > [Latest books from Dr. Clay at: http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/Stardoc44 ]
                                      > ASO Petit Jean Mountain /MPC H41
                                      > ASO Petit Jean Mountain South /MPC H45
                                      > ASO West Conway /MPC H43
                                      > ......serving astronomy since 1971
                                      > ____________________
                                      > ----- Original Message -----
                                      > From: "Dave Tholen" <tholen@...>
                                      > To: <drclay@...>; <drherald@...>;
                                      > <mpml@yahoogroups.com>
                                      > Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 5:50 PM
                                      > Subject: Re: {MPML} [mpml] An existing poll has been modified, check it
                                      > out.
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >>> And - for the record - it was not Marsden who pushed for the downgrade
                                      >>> of Pluto to dwarf planet status - he had already left the IAU meeting
                                      >>> that year
                                      >> Are you referring to the 2006 General Assembly in Prague? My
                                      >> recollection
                                      >> is that Marsden was there at the Closing General Assembly, participating
                                      >> in the vote as I was. But by then there were plenty of others arguing
                                      >> both sides of the case. It certainly wasn't a one-man show.
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > ------------------------------------
                                      > Posted by: "P. Clay Sherrod" <drclay@...>
                                      > ------------------------------------
                                      >
                                      > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                                      >
                                      > Posts to this list or information found within may be freely used, with
                                      > the stipulation that MPML and the originating author are cited as the
                                      > source of the information.
                                      > ------------------------------------
                                      >
                                      > Yahoo Groups Links
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >

                                      --
                                      Alan Harris harrisaw@...
                                      4603 Orange Knoll Ave. 818-790-8291
                                      La Canada, CA 91011



                                      ------------------------------------
                                      Posted by: Alan Harris <harrisaw@...>
                                      ------------------------------------

                                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                                      Posts to this list or information found within may be freely used, with the
                                      stipulation that MPML and the originating author are cited as the source of
                                      the information.
                                      ------------------------------------

                                      Yahoo Groups Links
                                    • Roy Tucker
                                      https://xkcd.com/386/
                                      Message 18 of 20 , May 31, 2017

                                        https://xkcd.com/386/



                                        On 5/31/2017 5:00 PM, Thomas Dorman drygulch_99@... [mpml] wrote:
                                        Please drop this thread it's an old discussion that neither side can win. For the most part believe the poll is flawed and by design to insight there forth the reason we did not answer. Let it go!
                                        Thomas


                                        On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 6:35 PM, "Alan Harris harrisaw@... [mpml]" <mpml-noreply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


                                         
                                        If Brian had left the meeting it was his own knowing choice, there was
                                        no "revolution" involved in the voting at the closing General Assembly.
                                        As Dave Tholen, I was there, and even have my yellow "voting card"
                                        preserved as a souvenir of the occasion. The format of the General
                                        Assembly is an opening session, on the first day, which is mostly
                                        ceremonial and recreational (musical and dance performances by the host
                                        country, etc.), but with some "business" conducted. In the week or ten
                                        days that follow, administrative groups draft and put forth resolutions
                                        that are discussed in various sub-group (Division or Commission)
                                        meetings. In the final days, these drafts are posted to the membership
                                        for an further comment and notification of final voting. Normally,
                                        these are non-contentious and are passed at the closing General Assembly
                                        by near-unanimous voice vote. Knowing that the whole Pluto matter would
                                        be contentious, for the first time ever, I believe, voting cards were
                                        distributed as we entered the session to those qualified to vote (full
                                        members of the IAU, identified by blue bordered badges with the word
                                        "Member" on them. The Pluto issue was in fact divided into several
                                        sub-resolutions, the two most important were a resolution defining a new
                                        class of planet, named "dwarf planet", into which Pluto clearly fell,
                                        and then the really contentious one, "a dwarf lanet is not a planet". I
                                        voted yes for the new class "dwarf planet", which I thought was a useful
                                        distinction, but no for the second one, which I thought was semantic
                                        nonsense, like declaring a pine tree is not a tree. If you don't want a
                                        dwarf planet to be a planet, you need another word, a dwarf something
                                        else. Anyway, both passed, which implicitly removed Pluto from planethood.

                                        The person most involved in all this who follows MPML at some level is
                                        Rick Binzel. I believe he made presentations at both the opening and
                                        closing General Assemblies discussing the Pluto and planethood issues,
                                        and contributed to the drafting of the resolutions and sub-resolutions.

                                        Alan

                                        On 5/31/2017 4:04 PM, 'P. Clay Sherrod' drclay@... [mpml] wrote:
                                        > In a communication from Brian, I have been under the impression that he and many
                                        > others were on their way back to their respective homes when this was put out on the
                                        > table anew; he was totally surprised when he got back and learned that the discussion
                                        > had resurfaced. He laughingly called it a "grad student revolution."
                                        > ------------
                                        > Clay
                                        >
                                        > Arkansas Sky Observatories
                                        > WEB: www.arksky.org/
                                        > FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/groups/421163751426836/
                                        > [Latest books from Dr. Clay at: http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/Stardoc44 ]
                                        > ASO Petit Jean Mountain /MPC H41
                                        > ASO Petit Jean Mountain South /MPC H45
                                        > ASO West Conway /MPC H43
                                        > ......serving astronomy since 1971
                                        > ____________________
                                        > ----- Original Message -----
                                        > From: "Dave Tholen" <tholen@...>
                                        > To: <drclay@...>; <drherald@...>; <mpml@yahoogroups.com>
                                        > Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 5:50 PM
                                        > Subject: Re: {MPML} [mpml] An existing poll has been modified, check it out.
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >>> And - for the record - it was not Marsden who pushed for the downgrade
                                        >>> of Pluto to dwarf planet status - he had already left the IAU meeting
                                        >>> that year
                                        >> Are you referring to the 2006 General Assembly in Prague? My recollection
                                        >> is that Marsden was there at the Closing General Assembly, participating
                                        >> in the vote as I was. But by then there were plenty of others arguing
                                        >> both sides of the case. It certainly wasn't a one-man show.
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > ------------------------------------
                                        > Posted by: "P. Clay Sherrod" <drclay@...>
                                        > ------------------------------------
                                        >
                                        > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                                        >
                                        > Posts to this list or information found within may be freely used, with the stipulation that MPML and the originating author are cited as the source of the information.
                                        > ------------------------------------
                                        >
                                        > Yahoo Groups Links
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >

                                        --
                                        Alan Harris harrisaw@...
                                        4603 Orange Knoll Ave. 818-790-8291
                                        La Canada, CA 91011




                                      • Dave Tholen
                                        ... As others have noted, a lot of schoolkids have no trouble learning the names of 50 states. Heck, I even learned 50 state capitals as well. Gosh, I can t
                                        Message 19 of 20 , May 31, 2017
                                          > The concern behind Brian's push to downgrade Pluto was that if size was the
                                          > determinative factor, the number of 'planets' would grow enormously. In a
                                          > context where every schoolkid learns the 9 (8) planets, a list of 30 or 50
                                          > takes it out of easy learning for young kids - with whatever flow-on effect
                                          > on kids interest in astronomy etc.

                                          As others have noted, a lot of schoolkids have no trouble learning the
                                          names of 50 states. Heck, I even learned 50 state capitals as well.

                                          Gosh, I can't even remember what the number of country names I learned
                                          in school was back then. It's changed, but must have been over a
                                          hundred. Didn't learn all the capitals of those countries, but learned
                                          quite a few, well over 50. I don't think it's as big a deal as it's
                                          been made out to be.

                                          And we're nowhere close to 50 planets, even with roundness of shape
                                          being used as the criterion.

                                          I still like my "absolute magnitude of 0 or brighter" criterion, as it
                                          is divorced from any notion of whether the zone has been cleared or
                                          not, and you don't need to guess at an albedo to estimate the size.
                                          If the proposed "Planet Nine" that is sculpting the orbits of the
                                          extreme TNOs turns out to exist, how long will it be before we can
                                          determine whether it has cleared its zone and qualifies for planethood,
                                          even though the expected mass is up around 10 Earth masses?
                                        • James Gifford
                                          I think the originator of the poll has probably achieved his objective in getting people with better things to do rehashing what is now ancient history, and
                                          Message 20 of 20 , Jun 1, 2017
                                            I think the originator of the poll has probably achieved his objective in getting people with better things to do rehashing what is now ancient history, and which will not change.

                                            Regards Jim Gifford.

                                            Sent from my Windows 10 phone

                                            From: Dave Tholen tholen@... [mpml]
                                            Sent: Thursday, 1 June 2017 11:58 AM
                                            To: DRHerald@...; drclay@...; harrisaw@...; mpml@yahoogroups.com; tholen@...
                                            Cc: rpb@...
                                            Subject: Re: {MPML} [mpml] An existing poll has been modified, check it out.

                                             
                                            > The concern behind Brian's push to downgrade Pluto was that if size was the
                                            > determinative factor, the number of 'planets' would grow enormously. In a
                                            > context where every schoolkid learns the 9 (8) planets, a list of 30 or 50
                                            > takes it out of easy learning for young kids - with whatever flow-on effect
                                            > on kids interest in astronomy etc.

                                            As others have noted, a lot of schoolkids have no trouble learning the
                                            names of 50 states. Heck, I even learned 50 state capitals as well.

                                            Gosh, I can't even remember what the number of country names I learned
                                            in school was back then. It's changed, but must have been over a
                                            hundred. Didn't learn all the capitals of those countries, but learned
                                            quite a few, well over 50. I don't think it's as big a deal as it's
                                            been made out to be.

                                            And we're nowhere close to 50 planets, even with roundness of shape
                                            being used as the criterion.

                                            I still like my "absolute magnitude of 0 or brighter" criterion, as it
                                            is divorced from any notion of whether the zone has been cleared or
                                            not, and you don't need to guess at an albedo to estimate the size.
                                            If the proposed "Planet Nine" that is sculpting the orbits of the
                                            extreme TNOs turns out to exist, how long will it be before we can
                                            determine whether it has cleared its zone and qualifies for planethood,
                                            even though the expected mass is up around 10 Earth masses?




                                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.