A very long argument about the Pluto’s Planethood has started again after its 1930 discovery; Pluto got to be included as our solar system ninth planet. International Astronomical Union did reclassify Pluto as Dwarf Planet. This was a new category that had been created, and the organization did explicitly stress made Pluto from the ‘true’ planets. IAU’s newly created definition, it should be able to pass the three thresholds. These criteria includes: It must orbit the sun and none of the objects should be large enough so that it can be rounded to make a sphere by its gravity but also not too huge that its innards can host fusion mixes that energize stars, and it is important to ensure that it ‘cleared its neighborhood’ of the orbiting bodies. 

Pluto did fail at this hurdle as its surrounding -the circle of icy bodies beyond Neptune called as Kuiper Belt and is far from clear. Many researchers and Plutophilic members did oppose the IAU’s decision for several reasons. To begin with, some people pointed out that the new planet rules out things that are not moving around the sun. This means that billions of exoplanets in the galaxy aren’t planets in totality. Well, this is according to IAU.  The ‘clear your neighborhood’ requirement does seem to be very ridiculous to very researchers. Among the people puzzled includes Alan Stern, who is the principal researcher of NASA’s New Horizons Goals, which did fly by Pluto.

Stern has played a very big role in as a proponent of Pluto’s Planethood, and he has been able to criticize IAU take stemmed partly from a non-scientific willingness to keep the system planetary stable to a more manageable number. This is what then causes a flare-up. Stern and David Grinspoon who is a planetary scientist who has been able to publish a book on Pluto flyby, known as ‘Chasing New Horizons: Inside the Epic First Mission definition to Pluto.’ In the article, Grinspoon and Stern aimed at the IAU’s quick flawed planet, reserving unique ire for the ‘clearing your neighborhood.’ The criteria are not precise and hence does leave the borderline cases. The worst is they get to choose a definition that does not take care of physical features of a potential planet. With the definition, Pluto and dwarf planets have been considered as very large moons like Jupiter’s Europa, Ganymede and Callisto and Saturn huge satellite.