Your assertion of "law" is interesting as the first amendment would obviously prohibit any "law" requiring the use of specific names so I looked it up. https://www.iau.org/public/themes/naming/ Also interesting https://www.iau.org/public/themes/buying_star_names/
From the first link
The IAU has been the arbiter of planetary and satellite nomenclature since its inception in 1919. The various IAU Working Groups normally handle this process, and their decisions primarily affect the professional astronomers. But from time to time the IAU takes decisions and makes recommendations on issues concerning astronomical matters affecting other sciences or the public. ***Such decisions and recommendations are not enforceable by any national or international law; rather they establish conventions that are meant to help our understanding of astronomical objects and processes.*** Hence, IAU recommendations should rest on well-established scientific facts and have a broad consensus in the community concerned. (Emphasis mine) Reading a bit further on the second link, it is clear that IAU names are the names used in treaties when law needs to reference astronomical objects. The entire authority of IAU rests on the fact that scientists and the public take them seriously and use thier terms. But as pointed out in the second link there are plenty of other groups that name and sell names of stars. In reality these are no less valid than the names IAU gives except that no one takes them seriously or uses those names. If one of them started doing a better job than IAU there would be nothing to prevent them becoming the new standard body. Personally as I have hiked the mountains of the Wasatch front I have named many places. These names have been adopted by my family and circle of friends and are perfectly valid. I suppose I could name a few stars too if I wished or sell the names. Don't get me wrong. I like the IAU and scientists need a body to make sure we are referencing the same thing. I also have no dog in the Pluto fight. But language is something controlled by those who use it frequently and with most skill. IAU can try to influence that but cannot control it. On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 7:31 AM, Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> wrote:
Interesting point of view, Joel. The IAU does not have authority to control how language develops. Very true. When my daughter was a toddler, she called every bright star or planet in the "Venus". At the present time (recorded history and tradition aside), by international convention (law), they do have authority to define and name celestial bodies. Whether those names & classifications stick or not is up to the passage of time and the accumulation of scientific knowledge through investigation. You are correct also that a name does not change a celestial body's properties. It's the properties that determine what it is called. Science has this funny requirement of people agreeing on the definition of quite a few terms, thus the IAU's decision in this case, regardless if it goes against the grain of non-astronomers. I don't have a dog in this fight, I really don't care what anybody classifies Pluto as. "What's in a name? That which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet." Romeo and Juliet (II, ii, 1-2) Look Patrick, the horse is still twitching! ;) On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 6:59 AM, Joel Stucki <joel.stucki@gmail.com> wrote:
For the vast majority of human history the term "planet" which means "wanderer" included all permanent objects in our sky that did not have a fixed position against the other stars. Our ancestors identified 7 of them and our corresponding days of the week are named after them. I'm a bit upset about the demotion of the sun and moon from the list personally. Neither the IAU nor any other body has control over how language develops. If you want to call it a planet do so. The name we call an object does not change its properties. As a linguist I can tell you that language is directed by those who use it. In other words, over time those who talk about planets most will determine what the word will actually mean and your voice is no less authorative than the IAU or Neil Degrass Tyson on the matter. By the way dictionaries do not define words, cultures define words and dictionaries, a relatively modern invention, attempt to record those definitions. Our bizarre authority driven culture has oddly inflated the importance of dictionaries and grammarians as governing bodies of language.
As a side note, I personally will not support adding 3 additional days to our week to account for modern discovered planets unless those days are considered "weekend" days.
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".