To NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman: Please Grant Kaela's Request

 

Twitter is currently buzzing with news of a 10-year-old girl named Kaela who has written to NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman urging Pluto’s planetary reinstatement.

Kaela, who was born 10 years after the controversial and wrongful IAU demotion of Pluto, is correct, and I wholeheartedly second her request. I have tweeted Isaacman myself asking his support for this.

Her request is noteworthy not just because it reveals the critical thinking of a precocious child, but also because it reveals the error of those who, nearly 20 years ago, claimed that younger generations would accept Pluto’s status as a non-planet and look askance at older people who refused to accept the change.

This clearly did not happen. To this day, children visiting observatories and planetaria regularly ask about Pluto and express their preference for it to be classified as a planet. Clearly, there are inherent, compelling reasons that transcend age and nostalgia, that compel people who look at this tiny, complex world to see a planet.

In this case, a child really does understand the situation better than the four percent of the IAU who voted in 2006 and those who support their decision.

Sometimes, claims are presented as scientific when they are instead political. An example of this is when oil companies conduct studies that conclude that fossil fuels are not causing global warming. In decades past, tobacco companies conducted similar studies claiming cigarette smoking does not cause cancer.

Coming up with a desired conclusion and then twisting the evidence to support that conclusion is not science but propaganda.

This is essentially what four percent of the IAU did in 2006. A majority of those who voted wanted Pluto out as a planet. They then contrived the reason of orbit clearing, which had never been used in planet definition, to get the result they wanted and exclude Pluto.

This is not to say that orbit clearing isn’t significant. That does not mean it should be a requirement for planethood. A 2000 study distinguished between “uber planets,” which clear their orbits, and “unter planets,” which do not. However, this study, which was cited by IAU members who voted in 2006, never said that “unter planets” should not be considered planets at all.

There is no reason why we cannot say that some planets gravitationally dominate or clear their orbits while others do not. This puts them in different subcategories but still under the general umbrella of the broad category of planets.

Evidence for the contrived nature of the IAU decision can be seen in the fact of who remained on the last day of the two-week General Assembly to vote on the resolution that “reclassified” Pluto. The chair of the IAU’s own Planet Definition Committee left before the vote because he had no idea there would be a vote! The same is true for the majority of IAU members who attended the conference.

IAU rules require any resolution put to the General Assembly to first be vetted by the appropriate IAU committee. This was not done in 2006, meaning the vote violated the IAU’s own bylaws! An earlier resolution that did go before the Planet Definition Committee was defeated at the General Assembly. At that point, the appropriate thing would have been to wait until the next General Assembly in 2009 and go through the proper channels.

But this was not done! A resolution hastily thrown together the night before the last day of the conference was put to a vote on that day, before most attendees had even had a chance to read its contents and consider its merits.

The IAU cited “new information,” namely the discovery of Eris, as a reason for the reclassification. However, they have been very selective in deciding which new information counts as a reason to reconsider the issue.

The New Horizons flyby clearly revealed Pluto to be a complex world with active geology and planetary processes, some seen elsewhere in the solar system only on Earth and Mars, yet this new information was never considered a reason to reopen the discussion of planet definition, as it should have been.

When the Internet first became a thing, people hoped it would serve as a democratizing influence, giving everyone a voice in issues important to them. While this has not always happened, the Internet has played a major role in opposition to the demotion of Pluto, and Kaela’s letter represents only the latest in nearly two decades of these efforts by people around the world.

I not only second Kaela’s motion, but genuinely urge our NASA Administrator to consider the facts surrounding the IAU vote and the reality of Pluto as discovered by New Horizons, to consult with New Horizons principal investigator Alan Stern, and to grant Kaela’s request.

Pluto Discovered 96 Years Ago Today

 

Today is International Pluto Day, marking the discovery of planet Pluto by Clyde Tombaugh at the Lowell Observatory 96 years ago, on February 18, 1930.

It is a day to celebrate all things Pluto, a planet whose understanding has eluded people for nearly a century.

When first discovered, Pluto’s planethood was questioned because telescopes of the time could not resolve it into a disk. Later, when it was revealed to be spherical, meaning rounded by its own gravity, many planetary scientists assumed it to be a dead world with no active geology or planetary processes.

The New Horizons flyby proved that wrong, revealing Pluto to be a surprisingly active world with complex processes, some of which are seen elsewhere in the solar system only on Earth and Mars.

Incorrect assumptions have often been made about Pluto because it is so small and so far away, making it a challenge to study and understand.

One of those incorrect assumptions, also a premature one, was the controversial decision by four percent of the IAU to label Pluto before the first reconnaissance of this world. Had the IAU waited for the New Horizons flyby, it would have become clear that Pluto, though small, has the same geology and processes seen on larger planets.

While Pluto was discovered in 1930, one could legitimately say people have been “discovering” its true nature for close to 100 years now, as Pluto continues to surprise us.

At last summer’s conference, “Progress in Understanding the Pluto System: Ten Years After Flyby,” possible next steps in the discovery of Pluto’s nature, namely hypothetical orbiter missions, were presented and discussed. As of now, there are no formal plans for any of these missions, but they are still worth being given serious consideration.

Planetary scientist Carly Howett, in her presentation titled, “Persephone: A Pluto System Orbiter and Kuiper Belt Explorer,” outlined a NASA-funded concept study involving returning to the Pluto system with an orbiter.

Orbiters are generally the next step in planetary exploration after the first reconnaissance of a world in a flyby, like that New Horizons did at Pluto in 2015.

The goal of the Persephone mission would be understanding Pluto’s composition, including its possible subsurface ocean, determining how Pluto’s surfaces and atmosphere evolved, and studying the diversity of the Kuiper Belt.

According to the proposal, the spacecraft would orbit Pluto for 1.3 years, then leave on an extended mission to explore the Kuiper Belt.

The proposal recommends a payload of 11 science instruments and notes that ice-penetrating radar would have to be powered by a radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG), the nuclear battery that powers New Horizons.

The spacecraft would conduct high and low flybys of Pluto, use Charon to change its orbit, and image all of Pluto at high resolution.

Drawbacks include the $3 billion cost, excluding launch vehicles, and the fact that travel time from Earth to Pluto would take 27.3 years.

Another proposal, “The Gold Standard: A Combined Pluto Orbiter and KBO Explorer Mission” was presented by Alan Stern. This spacecraft would be powered by an electric propulsion system using RTGs but have a smaller payload than Persephone.

The spacecraft would orbit Pluto for two years, then go on to visit other KBOs.

Stern noted that braking the spacecraft to enter Pluto orbit would double the travel time to the planetary system.

Including launch vehicles, this mission would cost $2.7 billion. Using three RTGs, existing launch systems could launch this spacecraft with current technology.

Returning to Pluto is a worthwhile endeavor for many reasons. Pluto joins a growing number of ocean worlds like Europa and Enceladus, which could potentially host microbial life in their subsurface oceans.

Embarking on such a mission would also give humanity another chance to study the Kuiper Belt in situ rather than from a great distance.

Discovery is an ongoing process not limited to one person or one time period. When Clyde Tombaugh first found Pluto, no one really understood what it was. Today, New Horizons has given us more knowledge and understanding of this small world than ever, but that is only a beginning.

We do know that Pluto is both a small planet and a Kuiper Belt Object. Neither of these categories precludes the other. The first tells us what it is while the second tells us where it is.

One legacy of Tombaugh’s find is not just that there are more planets out there than previously thought, but there are more types of planets out there than we recognize, even today.

Exploring the frontiers of our solar system is just a first step in looking even further beyond to the amazing variety of worlds and phenomena waiting to be discovered.

I Heart Pluto Festival Returns to Lowell Observatory this Weekend

This weekend kicks off Lowell Observatory’s annual celebration of Pluto’s 1930 discovery by Clyde Tombaugh with its annual I Heart Pluto celebration.

The celebration actually began last night, with a Beer Unveiling and Astronomy on Tap where this year’s Pluto-themed beer was unveiled.

Tonight, there will be a Pluto Pub Crawl throughout Flagstaff, Arizona, where participants can enjoy custom-made Pluto-themed drinks and interact with astronomers and science educators.

The keynote of this year’s celebration will take place tomorrow night, February 14, with the Night of Discovery, whose theme is “Mother Road to the Stars,” honoring both Pluto and the centennial of Route 66.

It will be followed by several talks on Sunday, February 15, including “Fantastic Worlds and How to Find Them” with Dr. Alex Polanski, “Tour of the Solar System from the Sun to Pluto and Beyond” with Dean Regas, “Defending Earth: The Science of Planetary Defense” with Dr. Nick Moskovitz, “How Low Temperatures Enable Pluto’s Exotic Geology” with Dr. Will Grundy, and “Iron Rain to Supersonic Winds: Our View of Exo-Jupiters” with Dr. James Sikora.

Pluto’s Birthday Bash will take place on Monday, February 16, featuring a birthday cake, vendors, and crafts. There will also be activities at Lowell including a talk about Pluto, a special Pluto tour, a beer garden, and a celebration of the New Horizons mission at the Astrolab.

I don’t know whether any of the talks will be streamed online or recorded and put online later, but if they are, I will post the links to them.

For more details, visit Lowell Observatory’s I Heart Pluto page.

New Horizons Saved as Congress Reverses NASA Cuts

 

The New Year begins with some good news for New Horizons and for many other NASA missions. The US House and Senate have passed a bill that rejects the cuts to NASA first proposed in June by the White House and instead approved $24.4 billion for NASA this year, of which $7.25 billion will go to the agency’s Science Mission Directorate.

New Horizons will continue to be funded, as will all but one other NASA mission.
While the total NASA budget is slightly below that of 2025, both houses of Congress overwhelmingly rejected the controversial proposal to cut 24% of NASA’s total funding of which 47% would have been cut from NASA science missions.

This reversal did not just happen on its own. Credit goes to the Planetary Society for its tireless efforts in lobbying against these cuts. According to an announcement of the good news sent by the Planetary Society, these efforts included close to 100,000 messages sent to Congress, outreach to Senators and Congress members in every state and district, and two days of lobbying action on Capitol Hill in October in which 346 people participated.

We owe a debt of gratitude to the Planetary Society and all who took part in these efforts for saving so many valuable space missions, including readers of this blog.

No current mission can do what New Horizons is currently doing because it is the only spacecraft with operational science instruments deep in the Kuiper Belt. New Horizons continues to observe this region up close while also studying the solar wind as well as structures and processes in the Milky Way.

Efforts to find a third flyby target, another KBO in the spacecraft’s path, are ongoing.
Sometimes, it’s hard to remember that this overwhelmingly successful mission endured multiple cancellations before it even launched. It is a mission that happened because people believed in it and fought for it over years and even decades.

When the NASA cuts were proposed last summer, New Horizons principal investigator Alan Stern joked, “We’ve been dead before.” That statement held an underlying truth—that this particular mission has survived numerous attempts to cancel it. If it were as “dead” as it were those times, things might not have been as bad as they seemed.

And sure enough, New Horizons is once again back from the brink of death.

Advocacy and action by large numbers of people can and does make a difference. Democracy is not a spectator sport. The tireless efforts of many brought this and various other crucial NASA missions back from near death.

A third New Horizons flyby may not be a given, but I certainly wouldn’t count it out just yet.