Who decides? ? Smart finish for SMART-1 ? Thoughts on Pluto ? GCSE Astronomy results ? BGA plans for geophysics education ? AKARI opens its eyes.

Abstract

Sue Bowler, Editor The on-going debate on the definition of a planet raises issues about authority within the scientific community – and outside. The IAU makes decisions about planets and minor planets (as they were). Their decision-making process, described on pages 16–17 of this issue, resulted in a necessary compromise. And a compromise, of course, contains something for everyone to disagree with. Disagree they did, although all seem to agree that the definition is likely to evolve as we find out more about the solar system. Despite the difficulties in reaching agreement between the many disciplines involved in planetary research – space and planetary scientists, as well as the traditional astronomical observer – it has to be done. And it is the IAU’s job to do it. The job is only going to get harder, for of course, the next step is to consider extrasolar planets. Here it is the big planets that cause the trouble: we need to be able to tell them apart from a star. But perhaps the debate should involve more disparate groups of people. Yes, we should ensure that a range of researchers can get involved, but what about eveyone else? There is great – and often proprietorial – public interest in planets. Many of the of internet petitions that have sprung up in recent weeks have had the general theme of “Put Pluto back”. It is great to have such public interest in astronomy, but a shame that the overall impression seems to be a vague feeling of loss, together with confusion over how many planets there really are. Without going to the lengths of reality television (24-hour payto-view footage and a public vote to keep your favourite planet in the solar system) are there ways that the public could be involved in such a decision? And should they be? As they say on Big Brother: “You decide”. Editorial NEws