Celestia Forums

Quaoar isn't treated the same as the other planets
when i turn on planet orbits, all the orbit rings apear for all the planets, except Quaoar, unless you select Quaoar.

also can the 0 (zero) key be made to select Quaoar
as we have H for our sun ?

Darkmiss wrote:Quaoar isn't treated the same as the other planets
when i turn on planet orbits, all the orbit rings apear for all the planets, except Quaoar, unless you select Quaoar.

also can the 0 (zero) key be made to select Quaoar
as we have H for our sun ?

Quaoar is not a planet or a moon. Only planets and moons' orbits are seen without selecting them. Try modifying "kuiperbelt.ssc" and reclassify Quaoar as a planet or moon to fix that problem.
The 0 (zero) key can not be made to select Quaoar. It should be made to select the sun (or any other star that is within 1000 ly of you).

Oops, a mistake 1 ly. Not 1000

Anonymous wrote:Quaoar is not a planet or a moon. Only planets and moons' orbits are seen without selecting them.

Well, technically speaking, Pluto isn't really a planet either (even tho it was wrongly classified as one in the 1920s or 30s) and follows along the same lines as Quaoar -- a Kuiper Belt astroidal object of sizable porportion. So perhaps it shouldn't have an orbital ring when you turn on the planet orbital paths. Of course this is just my opinion... I could be wrong.

jrobert wrote:Well, technically speaking, Pluto isn't really a planet either (even tho it was wrongly classified as one in the 1920s or 30s)

I think Quaoar is just hurting the case for Pluto being a planet.

Well now im really confused
I always thought that pluto was our ninth planet.
and Celestia treats it as such.

And the news said we have found our tenth planet, Quaoar.

Paul,

It turns out that Pluto is just an overly large example of a typical Trans-Neptuian Object. Careful astronomical surveys are turning up more of them all the time. Most are a lot smaller, but big ones like Quaoar, are being found, too, just not quite as large as Pluto.

It seems that one of the divisions of the IAU a few years ago proposed cross-clasiifying Pluto as a TNO, since it really is a member of a different category of objects than the rest of the planets. They finally decided to leave Pluto with its designation of "planet'" to satisfy the people who had a strong emotional attachment to the status-quo. What's in a name, after all? "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet," someone or other once wrote

One discussion of this tempest-in-a-teapot can be found on the Planetary Society's Web site at http://www.planetary.org/html/news/articlearchive/headlines/1999/headln-020499.html

I hope this clarifies things a little.

Ah okay, you come to my rescue a lot, thanks Seldon

So we officially only have eight planets.
Hmm okay

Sorry for all the questions, but im learning loads from you guys,

Officially we still have 9. It's just that one of them is something else.

Actually I don't mind answering questions, especially knowing there's someone else staring over my shoulder (figuratively speaking) who'll jump in if I botch the explanation too badly. I won't try to spell his handle. It's some long Greek thing.

I trust you realize that a lot of the time I just ask Google to get the up-to-date details. You could too, you know. Of course, recognizing which Web pages are completely bogus is useful, too.

If you really get interested in the gory details, NASA's Astrophysical Data Center has many (~50,000) abstracts of astronomical journal articles and conference proceedings online. Some of them are just teasers, but many summarize the results of the research described in the papers. And if you have access to a local university's library system, many of them subscribe to full-text electronic journal services, which include more than just the abstracts.

there are 9 planets indeed
the proof : when you press 9 on your keyboard, Celestia shows up Pluto !
Celestia can't be wrong