The problem with Pluto

Like most of you, I spent the majority of my life being taught that there are 9 planets in the solar system: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto. We were never really taught much about the planets or how they were defined, so we sat happy in our little bubbles.

It obviously came to a shock in 2006 when scientists decided to re-classify what a planet was. But the logic behind their decision does make some sense. More massive objects have been found in the Solar System along with objects of comparable sizes and shapes. The meeting in 2006 wasn't called to demote Pluto. It was called to decide what the definition of a planet should be. These other objects could have been included and we could realistically today be looking at a Solar System with nearer 15 recognised planets. But the requirement was made such that Pluto and the other smaller bodies were re-classified as Dwarf Planets.

Credit: R. Albrecht (ESA/ESO), NASA. http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap990213.html

Whilst the arguments and classification may not have been wholly accepted, it was at least based on science.

But it seems that there has been a revolution happening. When presented with the arguments, a group of people from the general public voted that Pluto should be reinstated at a meeting at Harvard University last week. It seems that many people disagree with the previous decision and want change!

But the meeting raises some interesting points. A large part of the argument to re-instate Pluto seems to come from a cultural and historical viewpoint. Pluto was considered a planet for 76 years, it seems wrong to suddenly change this. But the best thing about science is it's lack of opinion. Science is based on facts, statistics and logic. It was these tools that were used to change the status of Pluto and it's these tools that should be used for everything in science. When it was discovered that the Earth wasn't the centre of the solar system there was a huge uproar from people who believed it went against their religion, but now we look back at this and laugh (hopefully!).

So it may be that some day the definition of a planet is revisited and perhaps changed. But I just hope that this is due to scientific reasoning and not people feeling sorry for a giant piece of rock in space...

Galaxy swirls and blobs

Galaxies are like islands in the universe. They are the giant collections of stars, planets, gas, dust, black holes and the elusive Dark matter, that are dotted throughout the universe. They are often separated by millions of light years from their nearest neighbours with not much in-between. As we sit inside our galaxy, the Milky Way, it is often difficult to remember that we are just like one of those distant galaxies.

But every galaxy is unique. The Milky Way forms stars like most galaxies, contains the same things and are in general a very 'vanilla' galaxy, yet events throughout the life of the Milky Way has changed and shaped it to make it different from every other.

One of the most recognised difference between galaxies is their shape. This can be seen if you simply look at galaxies. Many of us if told to draw a galaxy would draw a big disk with spiral arms stretching out from the centre, because this is often the type of galaxy we see most in images (probably because they are the most stunning to look at). But these Spiral galaxies are not the only inhabitants of the universe. Giant spherical Elliptical galaxies with bulges of stars at the centre dominate the universe, containing the majority of all the stars. These galactic giants are very different from the beautiful spirals, both in looks and properties, on average forming much less stars and typically being much less active. Then there are Irregular shaped galaxies, those that look like no other due to their disturbed shapes. These can be elongated, squashed or take some shape that barely looks like a galaxy any more.

An elliptical galaxy.Credit:

J. Blakeslee (Washington State University

But why are there different shapes of galaxies and what causes them. Well we think it might be due to how galaxies interact with each other. It's generally accepted that Irregular galaxies are the result of merging galaxies and it's thought that Spirals in some way evolve in to Elliptical galaxies. But no one really knows how this happens and is one of the biggest mysteries is astrophysics. But as my research is trying to understand this problem, I should probably stop writing this post and get back to work!

A Spiral Galaxy. Credit: Image: European Space Agency & NASA

Wishing I was at British Science Fest

Work is still relatively quiet as some academics are making the last of the summer break, some people at work are observing at a telescope for the next couple of weeks and the students aren't back for another few weeks. But I'm stuck here doing work, like I'm supposed to (boo!).

I don't really mind, I do love my work, but this week I wish I was also somewhere else. I wish I wish I was at British science fest!

This annual science festival is one of the biggest places for all things sciencey. Over a week there are loads of great activities at the festival, based in Birmingham in the UK this year. The activities vary from talks on turning rubbish in to energy to a demonstration of how to walk on custard. The activities are generally at a level accessible by all ages and science knowledge, providing a great place for scientists and science lovers (not that they are mutually exclusive) together.

If you love science and have some spare time next year, or can pop down in the next few days, it's a really great place to go.

Check out their website for schedule and for info!
http://www.britishscienceassociation.org/british-science-festival

Meeting my great great Supervisor

It seems that one of the big things in the last few years are websites and programs about tracing your family tree. These online services allow you to enter your name and search records, such as birth and marriage certificates, and trace your family tree.
Well, there is a website (http://phdtree.org/) that take the family tree idea and puts a new edge on it. It allows scientists to trace their supervisor tree.
During your PhD, postdoc and undergraduate you will have a supervisor (essentially just your boss) who will help and advise you. Almost all scientists will have a supervisor during their academic studies, meaning that your supervisor also had a supervisor. And they had a supervisor and so on, all the way back hundreds of years. Many of the great greek philosophers were supervised/trained by other philosophers. So there is obviously an appeal to find out your supervisor family tree. Does your tree contain any famous scientists?
So I looked up my supervisor and found my academic genealogy and the results are pretty cool! A few generations back is Ernest Rutherford, who is famous for his revolutionary work in nuclear and particle physics. For example, he discovered and named the proton, one of the 3 particles that makes up an atom.
Go back a lot more layers and you reach Isaac Newton, the man famed for his work on understanding Gravity. A few levels above him is Galileo, the famous mathematician, physicists and astronomer. I could keep going back further, but the tree is so good that it's taking me some time to check every branch.
Finding out that these incredible people have passed down their knowledge and experiences through to me through a long list of supervisors gives me a very good feeling.
So if you are a scientist, go check out the website. If not, then why not pick a famous scientist and check their supervisor tree to see what other scientists are in their tree.