It's true I've been wangling to get the planet Mercury destroyed for a long time now, and I was perhaps wrong to drag that well-flogged cause into the already clouded orbit of this particular issue. See previous post for details.
However. Let's move on. I believe I've hit on a solution that will kill the best of both birds with one stone, so to speak. Let me recap the controversy for you.
We have this minority of scientists (the Dynamicists, they call themselves, as if they were a synchronized-disco troupe) who snuck a sneak vote in on the last day of some official conference in Prague a few years back, after most of the reputable astronomers had already gone home. The results of this vote - a vote, mind you, at which less than 4% of the members of the International Astronomical Union, planet Earth's official governing body and definers of the universe at large, were present! And what was decided at this farce against consensus? As soon as these smirking egopaths rang up their rigged-up tally and slunk from their locked room with the ballots tagged, bagged and bundled to make the whole thing official, the whole world found out what mischief had been wrought. With great pomp and condescension, the press releases began rolling forth from on high, declaring the results of this sham vote supposedly yanking Pluto's credentials, and sending our poor dog packing to the hinterlands of non-planethood.
One might rightly ask: does this perversion of both science and democracy mark the time for a general bloody uprising and revolution against this cabal-within-a-cabal of tyrants and usurpers?
But cool your heels. As I earlier alluded, I have a solution that may feed both dogs - from the same big, delicious bowl. The definition that this coterie of vote-fixing axe-grinders invoked to disqualify Pluto from planethood involved a new and shoddily-defined criterion. In addition to being in orbit around the sun (check!), in addition to having sufficient gravity to round its mass into a sphere (check!), a planet must now "clear the neighbourhood around its orbit."
Responsible astronomers have since pointed out (quite rightly) that none of the other planets - not Mercury, not Venus, not Earth, not Mars, not Jupiter, not Saturn, not Uranus, and certainly not Neptune - meets this rather nebulous "orbital clearing" requirement.
Quite a kerffufle, science fans! But what's my big idea? What's my win-win? Don't keep us in suspense, man, how do we fix the situation??
EASY.
We fix it easy.
There are two problems here, right? #1! People know Pluto is a planet, and you're not going to convince them otherwise. They know this "orbital clearance" is a no-sale, and they're dead right on that anyhow besides!
Whereas, the Dynamicists (problem #2) are so enamored of this "orbital clearing" stipulation, they've staked out a stance so hysterical that it would, if uniformly applied, threaten the planetdom of every planet in the solar system - and possibly, even beyond.
What possible philosophical compromise or bold plan of action could ever seduce these two antagonistic stances into bed together?
Hey. Calm down, would you? I told you I've got it covered!
Phase 1: collect the all various objects that cloud the orbits of Mercury through Neptune, potentially threatening their planetary statii.
Phase 2: deposit all that extra collected mass onto Pluto.
What did I tell you? EASY! Pluto would be enormous at that point! And we all know the real beef these Dynamicists had with it in the first place was that, hey, we can all admit it, Pluto was pretty shrimpy. Meanwhile, all the other planets with their brand-newly spiffed-up spic-and-span orbits would easily meet the Dynamicists trumped-up arbitrary definition.
Any other wrinkles left after that whole success story has been written can easily be ironed out by means of compromise, in the triumphant feel-good afterglow period. And everybody ends up happy.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: any fake uber-technical-looking spellings in this post were deliberately inserted so as to pad its perceived heft. I recognize this represents something of an intellectual compromise. But it is an intellectual compromise with honor.
However. Let's move on. I believe I've hit on a solution that will kill the best of both birds with one stone, so to speak. Let me recap the controversy for you.
We have this minority of scientists (the Dynamicists, they call themselves, as if they were a synchronized-disco troupe) who snuck a sneak vote in on the last day of some official conference in Prague a few years back, after most of the reputable astronomers had already gone home. The results of this vote - a vote, mind you, at which less than 4% of the members of the International Astronomical Union, planet Earth's official governing body and definers of the universe at large, were present! And what was decided at this farce against consensus? As soon as these smirking egopaths rang up their rigged-up tally and slunk from their locked room with the ballots tagged, bagged and bundled to make the whole thing official, the whole world found out what mischief had been wrought. With great pomp and condescension, the press releases began rolling forth from on high, declaring the results of this sham vote supposedly yanking Pluto's credentials, and sending our poor dog packing to the hinterlands of non-planethood.
One might rightly ask: does this perversion of both science and democracy mark the time for a general bloody uprising and revolution against this cabal-within-a-cabal of tyrants and usurpers?
But cool your heels. As I earlier alluded, I have a solution that may feed both dogs - from the same big, delicious bowl. The definition that this coterie of vote-fixing axe-grinders invoked to disqualify Pluto from planethood involved a new and shoddily-defined criterion. In addition to being in orbit around the sun (check!), in addition to having sufficient gravity to round its mass into a sphere (check!), a planet must now "clear the neighbourhood around its orbit."
Responsible astronomers have since pointed out (quite rightly) that none of the other planets - not Mercury, not Venus, not Earth, not Mars, not Jupiter, not Saturn, not Uranus, and certainly not Neptune - meets this rather nebulous "orbital clearing" requirement.
Quite a kerffufle, science fans! But what's my big idea? What's my win-win? Don't keep us in suspense, man, how do we fix the situation??
EASY.
We fix it easy.
There are two problems here, right? #1! People know Pluto is a planet, and you're not going to convince them otherwise. They know this "orbital clearance" is a no-sale, and they're dead right on that anyhow besides!
Whereas, the Dynamicists (problem #2) are so enamored of this "orbital clearing" stipulation, they've staked out a stance so hysterical that it would, if uniformly applied, threaten the planetdom of every planet in the solar system - and possibly, even beyond.
What possible philosophical compromise or bold plan of action could ever seduce these two antagonistic stances into bed together?
Hey. Calm down, would you? I told you I've got it covered!
Phase 1: collect the all various objects that cloud the orbits of Mercury through Neptune, potentially threatening their planetary statii.
Phase 2: deposit all that extra collected mass onto Pluto.
What did I tell you? EASY! Pluto would be enormous at that point! And we all know the real beef these Dynamicists had with it in the first place was that, hey, we can all admit it, Pluto was pretty shrimpy. Meanwhile, all the other planets with their brand-newly spiffed-up spic-and-span orbits would easily meet the Dynamicists trumped-up arbitrary definition.
Any other wrinkles left after that whole success story has been written can easily be ironed out by means of compromise, in the triumphant feel-good afterglow period. And everybody ends up happy.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: any fake uber-technical-looking spellings in this post were deliberately inserted so as to pad its perceived heft. I recognize this represents something of an intellectual compromise. But it is an intellectual compromise with honor.
Comments