tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28679937.post115928864900794184..comments2007-04-13T10:35:48.200-04:00Jeffrey Kishnernoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28679937.post-1159479595667705762006-09-28T17:39:00.000-04:002006-09-28T17:39:00.000-04:00I don't see it as a problem. I believe Lynn was talking about the synchronicity in which these were the first three celestial bodies to be classified as dwarf planets, relating the mythological meanings of these dwarf planets to the Plutonic process of death, transformation and rebirth.<BR/><BR/>When and if other bodies are classified as dwarf planets, there will be a different archetypal "flavor" to that decision.Jeffrey Kishnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00053072876900177367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28679937.post-1159477559808805272006-09-28T17:05:00.000-04:002006-09-28T17:05:00.000-04:00The problem with this is that while there may be 3 dwarf planets to start with, there are many other 'candidates' out there, objects orbiting past Neptune whose size is, as of now, uncertain, thus making it uncertain as to whether they are big enough to be spherical. However, as more measurements are made, objects like Quaoar, Orcus, Sedna, or the as yet unnammed 2005 FY9, will probably be classified as dwarf planets.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com