If I get one and he approves public posting I will certainly post it without any editing on my part.
I'm starting a new thread to focus on some of Brown's planet definition comments. I think he has done a lot of good thinking on this issue with the exception of a flawed acceptance of the "we can't have too many planets concept." He's actually made me enthusiasticaly favor a dwarf planet class although I was not opposed to it as a subcategory of planets. I just think they should still be counted as planets because the dividing line between dwarf planet and terrestrial planet would be less clear than between planetisimal (typical asteroid, comet,and/or kbo) and dwarf planet.
Regards,
Mark
Space/Science » in reply to re: E-Mail To Mike Brown - It would be great to see a reply to the HZ.
re: E-Mail To Mike Brown - It would be great to see a reply to the HZ.
The whole thread (27 posts)
- Planetary Scientists Officially Oppose Bad Science
- re:And what exactly is the alternative definition of a planet? (n/t)
- Unclear, but probably closer to original
- Yawn... Much heat and smoke, no light. (n/t)
- Signatures
- re:And what exactly is the alternative definition of a planet? (n/t)
