Colbert and The New Planets

Colbert thrashes the new planets. Neil de Grass Tyson, Astrophysicist and Director, Hayden Planetarium, of New York City is on the show. A planet is something that's round?

More like this

--Director of the famous Hayden Planetarium at the Museum of Natural History, New York City -- Hosted the science TV show "NOVA scienceNOW" on PBS --Named to host new sequel to Carl Sagan's "Cosmos" TV series on Fox later in 2013 In addition to his research, astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson is…
tags: education, public outreach, SciCafe, science cafe, AMNH, American Museum of Natural History, NYC, streaming video Who: A Conversation with AMNH Astronomer, Neil deGrasse Tyson What: free public presentation, "Life, the Universe, and Everything" When: Tonight at 700pm Where: Gottesman Hall…
tags: education, public outreach, SciCafe, science cafe, AMNH, American Museum of Natural History, NYC, streaming video Who: A Conversation with AMNH Astronomer, Neil deGrasse Tyson What: free public presentation, "Life, the Universe, and Everything" When: Wednesday, 2 June at 700pm Where:…
Check out my guest post at the venerable Times Online: Built into the streets of New York City is a solar calendar on a truly massive scale. Every year around July 12th, New Yorkers are treated to a spectacular phenomenon as the setting sun aligns directly with the east-west streets of Manhattan's…

I think it's a great definition. Something that orbits a star, not another planet, and that's gravity has collapsed its structure to be round.

It's better than "a planet is whatever we arbitrarily decide in some meeting at some point", which is more or less the current definition.

;)

Ok, so does "Sharon" (Or is it Charoon, after the Greek boatsman?..), previously considered Pluto's moon, orbit the Sun, Pluto, or both (making it a double-planet system)? Anyway you see it, the same applies for our (or should I say America's) moon, and any other moon. There's no clean cut, it's a continuum, and there will always be arbitrary decisions about that.
(Maybe the definition could be reconstructed so that the point the two "planets" revolve around has to be outside the perimeter of both planets. somewhere in between. I don't know if this is the case for Pluto and Charoon.)