FSM Board: Science: Alpha Centauri No More

FSM HOME

SEARCH FSM


LOG IN

Forgot Login?

Register



	General Discussion • Trading Post • Non-Film Score Discussion
	Profile • Preferences • Community Rules • Help/Contact • Search Board


Search Terms:
Search Within:	search tips

You must log in or register to post.

Go to page:

Non-Film Score Discussion: Science: Alpha Centauri No More

Last Post


	Posted:	Nov 28, 2016 - 5:45 PM
	By:	Solium (Member)

No wonder the Robinson family got lost in Space. :-(

"Alpha Centauri" is getting the boot. The longstanding star name has been displaced by its ancient counterpart in a new International Astronomical Union (IAU) catalog that designates 227 official names for different stars in the sky.

Alpha Centauri, which lies 4.35 light-years from the sun, is now known officially as "Rigil Kentaurus," the ancient name for the system.

The move was intended to reduce confusion, according to the IAU. For instance, a star like Fomalhaut has at least 30 different names, so it's difficult to figure out what to call it — or even how to spell it. Variations over the years have included Fumalhaut, Fomalhut and even the unusual Fomal'gaut

Source:
http://www.space.com/34835-alpha-centauri-new-star-names.html


	Posted:	Nov 28, 2016 - 6:03 PM
	By:	Metryq (Member)

Makes sense to me. I know it may annoy some—like those who whined about Pluto being "demoted" from planet status. I can see where that one might be argued (the IAU definition doesn't make sense), but that's what the IAU is for. There are so many catalogs and names. Sweeping away the old names and settling on one, official name should clarify things. As noted in the article, Rigil Kentaurus is an old, long-established name. "Alpha Centauri" is a constellation designation. I'm reminded of how old some books or sci-fi stories are when I hear Andromeda referred to as a nebula.

For that matter, our moon is known officially by the name Moon, not Luna, which is popular in sci-fi. Since "moon" has taken on generic meaning, the Moon should have a name, like Luna.


	Posted:	Nov 28, 2016 - 6:21 PM
	By:	Last Child (Member)

For that matter, our moon is known officially by the name Moon, not Luna, which is popular in sci-fi. Since "moon" has taken on generic meaning, the Moon should have a name, like Luna.

Reissues of SPACE:1999 videos and music should change all references of "Moonbase Alpha" to "Luna Base Rigil." Fanderson needs to be notified asap.


	Posted:	Nov 28, 2016 - 6:27 PM
	By:	Solium (Member)

If there's a legitimate scientific reason for a change, I'm all for it. But it will always be Alpha Centauri to me. (for various reasons)

Regarding Pluto, it's demotion was done by a minority on the board, and was hardly a democratic decision. I would also argue the new definition for a Planet is pretty arbitrary. Another reason I don't like Pluto's demotion.


	Posted:	Nov 28, 2016 - 7:07 PM
	By:	Metryq (Member)

Last Child wrote: Reissues of SPACE:1999 videos and music should change all references of "Moonbase Alpha" to "Luna Base Rigil." Fanderson needs to be notified asap.

Although "Rigil Kentaurus" is a descriptive name, it is still a formal name, while "Alpha Centauri" is more like a number. Maybe you think we should change Earth to "Sol 3"? Naming the fictional moonbase Alpha implies that it is the first. Maybe there's room for fanfic about the guys at moonbase Beta who did make a run for Sol 3 and failed. Or maybe "moonbase" Beta is not on Luna, but some other body.

Solium wrote: If there's a legitimate scientific reason for a change, I'm all for it. But it will always be Alpha Centauri to me. (for various reasons)

"Legitimate" and "scientific"? Perhaps you use your own temperature scale and ignore SI units because there's no "legitimate" or "scientific" reason to make yourself as clear as possible to others? The IAU is the legitimacy; they're the body for establishing the nomenclature. I don't get the "scientific" argument at all. Maybe we can find out what the star system calls itself? Maybe the name is etched into it somewhere?

Solium wrote: I would also argue the new definition for a Planet is pretty arbitrary.

I believe I said that. Since Pluto passes inside Neptune's orbit, and because Jupiter has Trojans, maybe all of them should be "demoted." The "sweep out its orbit" part of the definition is based on the flawed nebular hypothesis. And my use of the word "demoted" was sarcastic. The body is still Pluto, right? Sounds to me like you're getting worked up over irrelevancies, rather than actual science. Maybe you can suggest a better definition for planet that explains why all the minor planets ("asteroids") and KBOs are not full planets with all the perqs?


	Posted:	Nov 28, 2016 - 7:26 PM
	By:	Solium (Member)

Solium wrote: If there's a legitimate scientific reason for a change, I'm all for it. But it will always be Alpha Centauri to me. (for various reasons)

"Legitimate" and "scientific"? Perhaps you use your own temperature scale and ignore SI units because there's no "legitimate" or "scientific" reason to make yourself as clear as possible to others? The IAU is the legitimacy; they're the body for establishing the nomenclature. I don't get the "scientific" argument at all. Maybe we can find out what the star system calls itself? Maybe the name is etched into it somewhere?

Oh I wasn't arguing the name change. When I said it will always be Alpha Centauri to me, it's purely for sentimental reasons, and not scientific at all.

Solium wrote: I would also argue the new definition for a Planet is pretty arbitrary.

I believe I said that. Since Pluto passes inside Neptune's orbit, and because Jupiter has Trojans, maybe all of them should be "demoted." The "sweep out its orbit" part of the definition is based on the flawed nebular hypothesis. And my use of the word "demoted" was sarcastic. The body is still Pluto, right? Sounds to me like you're getting worked up over irrelevancies, rather than actual science. Maybe you can suggest a better definition for planet that explains why all the minor planets ("asteroids") and KBOs are not full planets with all the perqs?

It's large enough to be round, and it orbits it's star says planet to me. (add it has a moon if you like) The "clearing it's neighbors orbit" is completely arbitrary. Again this reclassification was made when most of the IAU were adjourned. Meaning a minority made this classification change.


	Posted:	Nov 28, 2016 - 9:01 PM
	By:	Last Child (Member)

Science: Alpha Centauri No More

So shouldnt the thread title be "Alpha Centauri Omega"?


	Posted:	Nov 28, 2016 - 10:29 PM
	By:	Justin Boggan (Member)

Funny, I was thinking of something similar: we have a lot of names for fucktards online, but it's messy so I was thinking of narrowing it down to one word: assholes.

I took the scientific approach. ;-)

Seriously though, lots of people know Alpha Centauri -- that would be a good name to stick with.


	Posted:	Nov 29, 2016 - 6:02 AM
	By:	Tall Guy (Member)

For that matter, our moon is known officially by the name Moon, not Luna, which is popular in sci-fi. Since "moon" has taken on generic meaning, the Moon should have a name, like Luna.

I think you've solved the problem - "the Moon" - as opposed to a moon. Definite article, capital letter.

And anyway, I doubt we'd be allowed to have nursery rhymes about there being a man in Luna.

Non-Film Score Discussion: Science: Alpha Centauri No More

First Post



	General Discussion • Trading Post • Non-Film Score Discussion
	Profile • Preferences • Community Rules • Help/Contact • Search Board

You must log in or register to post.

Go to page:

	© 2024 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.
	Website maintained and powered by Veraprise and Matrimont.