Pluto should still be considered a planet, according to new study

The transcript discusses Pluto's reclassification as a dwarf planet by the IAU in 2006 due to not meeting all three criteria for planet status. A new study challenges this definition, arguing it oversimplifies the solar system and excludes many large objects. The study suggests that Pluto, with its complex geology and atmosphere, should be considered a planet. The debate includes whether a planet should dominate its orbital zone, with Earth as an example. The study proposes a definition based on geological complexity, potentially increasing the number of recognized planets.

Why was Pluto reclassified as a dwarf planet in 2006?

• It shares its orbit with other objects.

• It is too small in size.

• It is not rounded by its own gravity.

• It does not orbit a star.

What was the purpose of the new planet definition according to the new study?

• To increase the number of recognized planets.

• To focus on the geological features of planets.

• To simplify the solar system's structure.

• To include more celestial bodies as planets.

What is the main argument of the new study regarding Pluto's classification?

• Pluto's orbit is unique and should be considered.

• Pluto's atmosphere is too thin to be a planet.

• Pluto should be classified based on its size.

• Pluto's geological complexity should define its status.

According to the new study, how many objects could be considered planets under a revised definition?

• 150

• 100

• 50

• 8

What does the new study suggest about the current number of planets in our solar system?

• It is too low.

• It is just right.

• It is too high.

• It should be based on size alone.