Pluto The Planet Is Back!!!

waybread

waybread

Well-known member
petosiris said:
Seems like a linguistic and formalism issue is related to it. Are dwarf planets - planets. They might be, but children in school and planetariums would certainly prefer to study 7 planets than 109 or thousands of exoplanets. We might as well call the current 8 planets (including Earth) - major planets (or formally, as it is now and clearly stated in the IAU resolution - planets), but Pluto should not be with those in light of discovery of greater objects than Pluto, which are not considered planets - then we would really have a problem as I see it. Thus I can sympathize with the 2006 IAU decision.
Click to expand...

Well, the IAU crowd has no sympathy for astrology, that's for sure. I doubt that you and the IAU would have much in common.

And no, it's not linguistic or formalistic. It's science.

I don't know which school children you mean. Some school children grow up to become astronomers. Some school children gaze at the night sky on camping trips and are awed by its vastness.

Space is full of what the late Carl Sagan called "billions and billions" of heavenly bodies. This is a source of wonder, not of complication on a multiple choice test.

What do you mean by "greater objects than Pluto, which are not considered planets"? Stars? Black holes? Wormholes in space?

You might enjoy this book by trans-Neptunian astronomer Mike Brown, How I killed Pluto and Why it Had It Coming:

https://www.amazon.com/How-Killed-Pluto-Why-Coming/dp/0385531109

And also this essay on his blog, "I [heart] astrologers" http://www.mikebrownsplanets.com/2008/01/i-heart-astrologers.html

I just don't feel threatened by new astronomical discoveries.
 
P

petosiris

Banned
I meant dwarf planets like Eris and such. If Pluto becomes a planet, shouldn't Eris also become a planet?

I doubt that you and the IAU would have much in common.
Click to expand...

Whatever. The constellations for my latitude they use are the same as the ones recorded by Ptolemy, a Hellenistic astrologer - except Argo as I've already mentioned.
 
waybread

waybread

Well-known member
petosiris said:
I meant dwarf planets like Eris and such. If Pluto becomes a planet, shouldn't Eris also become a planet?
Click to expand...

It's going to depend upon new knowledge of Eris and the other trans Neptunians. Currently little is known about Eris. Hopefully a NASA probe or space program of another nation will answer questions about its nature.
 
P

petosiris

Banned
And no, it's not linguistic or formalistic. It's science.
Click to expand...

Science is defined by linguistic and formalistic conventions because the demarcation problem is unsolvable. This is rarely a bad thing. It also is not bad that we have 8 formal planets rather than a thousand.

I don't know which school children you mean. Some school children grow up to become astronomers. Some school children gaze at the night sky on camping trips and are awed by its vastness.
Click to expand...

Then it is important to teach children about the terrestrial planets, gas giants and ice giants first and only those who are interested in astronomy - dwarf planets, exoplanets and Pluto. You are probably aware of the average attention span of a child that is fed information. Not every child is interested in astronomy, but it is still important to teach them the basics.
 
waybread

waybread

Well-known member
Petosiris, this is a thread about the "rehabilitation" of Pluto as a planet. I'd be happy to chat on a different thread about other topics.

Unfortunately, philosophers of science sometimes get concerned about issues that seldom furrow the brows of practicing scientists. [deleted sarcastic comment - Moderator]

If you have older children of your own, you know that they can become fascinated by certain topics, and learn huge amounts of information about them. By the age of 10 or so, my daughter amassed a huge amount of information about bats, for example.

The limits of the human mind and our knowledge of the cosmos are constantly expanding. Right now there are over 20,000 asteroids in our solar system. I don't have a problem with that. Do you?

Possibly you'd like to get into curriculum development on a professional basis. Then you could tell children not to explore astronomy beyond the classical planets. Any similarities to "creation science" or banning multi-cultural history would be purely coincidental.

We live in a vast cosmos that does have Carl Sagan's "billions and billions" of heavenly bodies. Closer to home, we do not yet know the outer limits of our solar system. Hopefully some day, we will.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
waybread

waybread

Well-known member
petosiris said:
That is kinda distasteful from you and I do not see any similarity with the IAU decision.
Click to expand...

Ah, well. Jupiter retrograde, perhaps?

I didn't posit any similarities with the IAU decision. Rather, it was with your seeming desire to inhibit children's curiosity about astronomy by severely limiting their studies.
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
waybread said:
Here is the 2006 IAU definition of a planet, dwarf planet, satellite and everything else.



Note also the category of trans-Neptunian objects.

As I think most of you know, Pluto was discovered in 1930. Astrologers did pick up on it soon after, although there was an initial debate about assigning its domicile to Aries or to Scorpio. The rationale with the modern outers was Capricorn/Saturn, Aquarius//Uranus, Pisces/Neptune. So presumably the next planet out, Pluto, belonged to Aries.

However, those of us who work with Pluto generally feel that Scorpio is a better match.
Click to expand...

Since I'm pattern oriented, I like this way of assigning rulership of Scorpio to Pluto--

Start with Traditional rulerships, and divide them into two very obvious categories: Those that move in only one direction, and those that have both Direct and Retrograde movement. Then apply rate of movement, faster to slower--

:moon:/:cancer:
:sun:/:leo:
______________________
:mercury:/:virgo:&:gemini:
:venus:/:libra:&:taurus:
:mars:/:scorpio:&:aries:
:jupiter:/:sagittarius:&:pisces:
:saturn:/:capricorn:& :aquarius:

Then, at the Solstice-ruler Saturn, "come to a standstill (stice)", by assigning Aquarius to Saturn as well, and turn back.

As each slower planet was discovered, the Sign occurring later in the seasonal order, with a seasonal year beginning with Sun in Aries, went from the slowest of the planets that still ruled 2 Signs, to the next slowest planet discovered. Thus between Capricorn and Aquarius, etc. :aquarius:-->:uranus:, :pisces:-->:neptune:, and :scorpio:-->:pluto:. The two innermost planets, which appear as both morning and evening stars, continue to rule 2 Signs each.
 
Last edited:
D

david starling

Well-known member
There's also an Ancient religious theme to Pluto's rulership of Scorpio. The Constellation itself related to Ancient Egypt, where scorpions swarmed the banks of the Nile during the Fall season of Ancient Babylonia. And, Pluto was essentially derived from the Egyptian ruler of the Underworld, Osiris.
 
Last edited:
D

david starling

Well-known member
Well, whether Astronomers like it or not, Pluto remains a respected member of Modern Astrology's Big Ten. The physical attributes of the planets are much less important in Modern compared to Traditional, and Pluto was discovered at the right time to be included in the pattern, size notwithstanding. Just fit right in.
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
Hey, I remember making this neat, simple model of the Solar system. A lightbulb for the Sun, a marble for the Moon, and Styrofoam balls for the planets, all on wire supports. Imagine what it would look like now!? :andy: Paper rings for Saturn. :biggrin:
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
david starling said:
Since I'm pattern oriented, I like this way of assigning rulership of Scorpio to Pluto--

Start with Traditional rulerships, and divide them into two very obvious categories: Those that move in only one direction, and those that have both Direct and Retrograde movement. Then apply rate of movement, faster to slower--

:moon:/:cancer:
:sun:/:leo:
______________________
:mercury:/:virgo:&:gemini:
:venus:/:libra:&:taurus:
:mars:/:scorpio:&:aries:
:jupiter:/:sagittarius:&:pisces:
:saturn:/:capricorn:& :aquarius:

Then, at the Solstice-ruler Saturn, "come to a standstill (stice)", by assigning Aquarius to Saturn as well, and turn back.

As each slower planet was discovered, the Sign occurring later in the seasonal order, with a seasonal year beginning with Sun in Aries, went from the slowest of the planets that still ruled 2 Signs, to the next slowest planet discovered. Thus between Capricorn and Aquarius, etc. :aquarius:-->:uranus:, :pisces:-->:neptune:, and :scorpio:-->:pluto:. The two innermost planets, which appear as both morning and evening stars, continue to rule 2 Signs each.
Click to expand...

I should mention that in the Southern Hemisphere, the seasonal year commencing with Sun in Aries begins in the Fall, but the pattern still holds.
 
waybread

waybread

Well-known member
Thanks, David.

I use Pluto because when I first started studying astrology, there was little traditional western astrology available. Since then, ca. 1990, there has been a Renaissance of western traditional astrology which is great. I've studied some of it. I use it in horary. I just wish astrologers like John Frawley didn't feel they had to make a case for traditional astrology by lampooning modern astrology, which is, after all, a field with very different schools of thought.

However, seeing how clearly Pluto worked in my own chart, I couldn't just go back and erase it.

A while ago, there was a thread where the OP basically argued that since astrologers began to use Pluto thanks to its astronomical discovery in 1930, logically astrologers should stop using it in 2006 when the IAU redefined it. This made no sense to me as a pragmatist who has seen how Pluto works in charts of people I know (or knew.) Obviously none of the traditional planets were discovered by astronomers.

However, I respect that the modern outers cannot be shoehorned into the traditional tables of essential dignities. Although the outer planets of course reflect light or they would never have been discovered; if naked-eye (aka "backyard") astronomy is important to traditional astrologers, due to their own understanding of what it means to cast light, I think we modern astrologers have to accept the differences in our respective systems. Just as I hope the trads accept that the modern outers work well in modern astrology, as we don't use the table of essential dignities.

I don't accept everything written about astrological Pluto. As I've said many times, I think we have to be connoisseurs of what we read. I'm not into evolutionary or karmic astrology. On the scale of closer to traditional (classical) or closer to more evolutionary/karmic astrology, I'm definitely more into closer to the classical side. While most people today use insights from modern psychology, I wouldn't call myself a "psychological" astrologer, either.

But Pluto? One of my nieces has Pluto conjunct sun in Scorpio. She is a physical anthropologist and archaeologist who studies old bones. She is also interested in forensic anthropology. If anyone here has read the Kathy Reichs "Bones" murder mysteries, where the main character is a forensic anthropologist who examines pretty gruesome materials, you get the (Plutonian) picture.
 
Last edited:
D

david starling

Well-known member
Pluto and Neptune easily lend themselves to a Generational theme, that's much more informative than terms like Gen X and Millennials. Obviously, it's not a blanket description, since the specific effects of these two Astrological-planets depends on the entire Chart, in context. However, there is an aggregate effect that can be seen if you know what to look for. I find Neptune more useful in that regard, but I've noticed that the younger Astrologers are more attuned to Pluto, both in Natal and for transits. The Neptune in Libra generation made huge changes during the Neptune in Scorpio transit.
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
AppLeo said:
I bet in 2030 they’ll classify it as a dwarf planet again.
Click to expand...
In fact, pluto remains a dwarf planet :smile:

because
final paragraph of the article linked by the OP
despite its headline grabbing claims
states clearly as follows:

'.....It seems very likely
that at some point
the IAU will reconsider its flawed definition.
In the meantime
we’ll keep referring to round objects in our solar system
and elsewhere
as planets...'
 
P

petosiris

Banned
JUPITERASC said:
In fact, pluto remains a dwarf planet :smile:

because
final paragraph of the article linked by the OP
despite its headline grabbing claims
states clearly as follows:

'.....It seems very likely
that at some point
the IAU will reconsider its flawed definition.
In the meantime
we’ll keep referring to round objects in our solar system
and elsewhere
as planets...'
Click to expand...

The OP title is somewhat misleading. The catchy media title to a degree as well, but that is characteristic of popular media.
 
waybread

waybread

Well-known member
Well, the whole thing merely highlights the difference between astrological planets and astronomical planets. BUT-- stay tuned, space fans. The IAU meets annually. Their 2018 program is set, but they are now calling for proposals for their 2019 symposia.
 
Top