belajar Astronomy
Sunday, March 1, 2020
Free Astronomy textbook
Astronomy  is designed to meet the scope and sequence requirements of one- or two-semester introductory astronomy courses. The book begins with relevant scientific fundamentals and progresses through an exploration of the solar system, stars, galaxies, and cosmology.
The Astronomy  textbook builds student understanding through the use of relevant analogies, clear and non-technical explanations, and rich illustrations. Mathematics is included in a flexible manner to meet the needs of individual instructors.
Download for free at https://openstax.org/details/books/astronomy
Posted by
destiny_of_aries
at
7:20 PM
1 comments
Labels:
textbook
Wednesday, August 28, 2019
Problems of International Astronomy Olympiad (2011)
Problems:  http://www.issp.ac.ru/iao/
Posted by
destiny_of_aries
at
11:17 AM
0
comments
Labels:
olimpiade ,
soal
Problems of International Astronomy Olympiad (2015)
Main webpage:  http://www.issp.ac.ru/iao/2015/iao15_e.html
Problems link: http://www.issp.ac.ru/iao/2015/booklet/index_e.html
Posted by
destiny_of_aries
at
11:06 AM
0
comments
Labels:
olimpiade ,
soal
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Supermoon 19 Maret 2011
Karena fenomena Supermoon ini cukup heboh dan banyak menimbulkan salah persepsi, mari coba dibahas sedikit meskipun sebenarnya fenomena ini bukanlah fenomena astronomi yang penting. Impact atau efeknya hampir tidak ada selain tinggi air pasang air laut sedikit lebih tinggi.
The Moon looks extra-big when it is beaming through foreground objects--a.k.a. "the Moon illusion." Credit: NASA
Dari perhitungan astronomi, pada tanggal 19 Maret 2011 Bulan dalam peredarannya mengelilingi Bumi, akan berada pada posisi paling dekat dengan Bumi, disebut sebagai posisi perigee. Tentunya dalam peredaran mengitari Bumi, Bulan akan selalui melalui posisi perigee, tetapi posisi perigee tersebut tidak selalu berada pada angka yang tepat sama, tetapi bervariasi sepanjang waktu.
Pada tanggal tersebut, yang pada saat itu Bulan dalam fase Purnama, dalam perhitungan merupakan jarak yang paling dekat ke Bumi semenjak 18 tahun yang lalu. Lalu? Apa yang akan terjadi? Beredar kabar di dunia maya, bahwa pada saat tersebut, akan terjadi bencana alam yang sangat dahsyat, mulai dari badai besar, gempa Bumi sampai dengan letusan gunung berapi. Sepertinya seram sekali! Tetapi benarkah itu?
Mari kita tinjau satu persatu, pertama, fenomena ‘supermoon’, ini sebetulnya adalah fenomena alam yang biasa terjadi. Pada suatu ketika, dalam peredarannya di langit, Bulan-Bumi-Matahari bisa berada dalam satu garis lurus, biasanya pada saat itu bisa terjadi bulan baru atau bulan purnama. Dan bila pada saat bulan purnama, Bulan berada pada posisi perigee, maka keadaan ini oleh para ahli astrologi (bukan ahli astronomi!) disebut ‘super moon’! Jadi istilah super moon bukanlah istilah astronomi, tetapi istilah astrologi.
Kedua, pada tanggal itu, akan terjadi bencana alam? Tentulah dalam siklus alamiah, Bulan mempengaruhi terjadinya gaya pasang surut laut di Bumi, dan ketika Bulan ‘mendekat’, tentulah pengaruh gravitasi Bulan menjadi lebih besar (demikian yang dikatakan hukum gravitasi Newton). Akan tetapi, apakah bila pengaruh gravitasi Bulan menjadi lebih besar, akan terjadi bencana alam? Mari kita sedikit berhitung dengan matematika. Ambil rata-rata jarak Bumi-Bulan 382900 km, sedangkan pada tanggal 19 Maret 2011, Bumi-Bulan berjarak 356577 km, atau ‘mendekat’ sejarak 26323 km, atau hanya 6,87% lebih dekat dibanding rata-rata.
Posisi Bulan saat berada di perigee atau titik terdekat dengan Bumi. courtsey physcorg.com
Dengan jarak yang sekecil itu (6,87%), akan menyebabkan dampak yang luar biasa? Seperti biasa, efek pasang surut terjadi setiap hari, dan bila resultan vektor gaya gravitasi Bulan & Matahari menjadi lebih besar maka efek pasang surut menjadi lebih besar. Menurut physorg.com (yang mengutip NASA), efek "perigeean ides" ini hanya menambah tinggi air pasang beberapa cm saja (maximum 15 cm).
Posisi Bumi-Bulan-Matahari dan kaitannya dengan pasang surut. kredit : Boomeria.org
Tentunya pada saat ketika purnama ditambah perigee, gaya gravitasi menjadi lebih berpengaruh, tetapi, dari studi geofisika yang telah banyak dilakukan, tidak dtemukan adanya dampak yang signifikan pada keseimbangan energi Bumi. Gempa Bumi, letusan vulkanik, ataupun berbagai fenomena di Bumi lebih disebabkan keseimbangan energi di Bumi, seperti pergeseran lempeng Bumi, sedangkan efek pasang surut oleh Bulan, tidaklah cukup kuat menggeser keseimbangan energi tersebut, yang artinya ‘super moon’ tidak akan menyebabkan bencana alam.
Mungkin dibutuhkan seorang Superman yang datang dari planet Kripton untuk menggeser keseimbangan Bumi, karena Superman mempunyai kekuatan yang jauh lebih besar dibanding kekuatan super moon; tetapi kita tahu bahwa superman adalah tokoh rekaan, sebagaimana bencana akibat super moon adalah telaah astrologi. Kalau sudah demikian, pertanyaan berikut, apa yang akan terjadi di tanggal 19 Maret yang akan datang?
Yang pasti Bulan akan tampak lebih ‘besar’ 14% dan 30% lebih cerlang di Banding ‘biasanya’, namun bisakah Anda membedakannya (bukan karena Anda punya asumsi awal bahwa Bulan lebih besar dari biasanya)?
Bulan Purnama saat di perigee akan tampak lebih besar 14%. kredit: NASA
Jawabannya belum tentu. Di langit tidak ada penggaris/meteran yang dapat digunakan untuk mengukur diameter Bulan (selain Anda menggunakan teleskop dengan skala ukuran di lensa nya). Jika Anda mengamati Bulan saat di titik tertingginya dan tidak ada benda lain sebagai pembanding, maka Anda tidak dapat membedakan bulan purnama ini (super moon) dengan bulan purnama biasa.
Untuk mendapatkan efek "piringan Bulan yang besar", Anda disarankan mengamati Bulan saat ada di dekat horizon. Pada posisi ini, ada efek ilusi optik yang akan menciptakan kesan bahwa piringan Bulan nampak lebih besar dari biasanya (efek ini terjadi pada saat gerhana Bulan "biasa" juga). Alasannya masih sulit dijelaskan oleh astronomer maupun psikolog. Bulan yang dekat dengan horizon akan nampak "sangat" besar (lihat ilustrasi gambar pertama).
So, apakah fenomena supermoon penting untuk diamati? jawabnya tergantung Anda. Anda bisa memanfaatkan momentum ini untuk mengadakan observasi Bulan bersama teman Anda, baik dengan mengamati langsung maupun dengan binokular/teleskop kecil.
Artikel di atas disadur dari Langit Selatan dengan beberapa perubahan yang diambil dari physorg.com .
Posted by
destiny_of_aries
at
12:27 AM
17
comments
Labels:
news
Monday, March 7, 2011
Documentaries
Beberapa kumpulan documentary yang menarik untuk disimak.
1. Universe: The Cosmology Quest
2. The Search for Life: The Drake Equation
3. The Universe
link
4. How the Universe Works
5. The Birth Of Earth
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Semoga bermanfaat
Posted by
destiny_of_aries
at
2:35 AM
7
comments
Labels:
video
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Pseudoscience vs Science
Akhir - akhir ini banyak sekali berita di media massa yang nampak seperti science namun sebenarnya hanya pseudo-science. Berikut ini ada artikel yang bagus mengenai hal ini, yang dikutip dari www.astronomynotes.com . Selamat membaca dan semoga bermanfaat.
"Yes, the world would be a more interesting place if there were UFOs lurking in the deep waters off Bermuda and eating ships and planes, or if dead people could take control of our hands and write us messages. It would be fascinating if adolescents were able to make telephone handsets rocket off their cradles just be thinking at them, or if our dreams could, more often than can be explained by chance and our knowledge of the world, accurately foretell the future." Just one nice passage among many, many in Carl Sagan's " The Demon-Haunted World " (available in the campus library and most public libraries). Well, Dr. Sagan, if the world would be more interesting if the unexplained UFOs were in fact space aliens, if we could communicate with the dead or space aliens, etc., why are you scientists such stuffy, party-poopers, insisting that the evidence is not good enough to prove that these things exist? With thousands of eye-witnesses, what more do you need? Sagan wrote that passage above just before he discussed pseudoscience in " The Demon-Haunted World ". If we understand the difference between real science and pseudoscience, perhaps we can understand the view of many scientists and skeptics that the UFO research is pseudoscience.
"Pseudo" means "not genuine; sham", something pretending to be something else that it is not . Pseudosciences "purport to use the methods and findings of science, while in fact they are faithless to its nature—often because they are based on insufficient evidence or because they ignore clues that point the other way " (Sagan, 1996). We are awash in pseudoscience from all around us because "pseudoscience is easier to contrive than science " ("contrive" is a pretty strong word choice by Dr. Sagan). With pseudoscience, the standards of argument and what is allowable as evidence are much more relaxed than what you find in science.
This is not to say that all of science is correct . No, there have been plenty of mistakes in science, plenty of blind alleys. No, reality is messier, more unpredictable than the best detective/murder-mystery novel. With science, hypotheses are framed in a way that they can be tested by experiment and observation. Nature has the final veto power in whatever explanation we come up with but scientists are human (yes, they are) and subject to emotional attachments to their explanations. They too can be offended when their pet explanation doesn't pan out, when Nature has vetoed it.
Pseudoscience is just the opposite. Hypotheses are often framed in a way that makes them untestable . "Practitioners [of pseudoscience] are defensive and wary. Skeptical scrutiny is opposed. When the pseudoscientific hypothesis fails to catch fire with scientists, conspiracies to suppress it are deduced" (Sagan, 1996). Ah, yes! How many times have we heard that the science journals won't publish the UFO research with charges of bias and close-mindedness on the part of the science "establishment"? Such charges are part of the conspiracy mindset. I'm sorry, but it is not a conspiracy. It is because the UFO evidence is not of the caliber needed to base conclusions upon and less fantastic alternative explanations that don't involve space aliens are not addressed or explored by the author of the proposed paper. Not every truly scientific paper makes it into the journals either but the scientist doesn't complain of a conspiracy. No, the paper was probably rejected because more data needed to be gathered to improve the signal (the confidence level) above the ever-present statistical fluctuations of reality in order to deduce the conclusion reached by the author. Sometimes, too strong a conclusion is deduced from too weak a data set. Another likelihood is that the author did not explore an alternative explanation because they failed to see the assumptions that they were operating under. Our filters can blind us to the obvious.
"Perhaps the sharpest distinction between science and pseudoscience is that science has a far keener appreciation of human imperfections and fallibility than does pseudoscience ." (Sagan, 1996) This is why conclusions based solely (or even mostly) on eye-witness testimony are not acceptable in science, however harsh that may seem to the layman . The Innocence Project (see www.innocenceproject.org ) has shown that eyewitness identification has played a significant role in 75% of the convictions that were later overturned through DNA testing. Thirty years of social science research has proven that eyewitness identification is often unreliable. Even victims of horrendous personal crimes have mis-identified the perpetrators. Unfortunately, our memories are malleable. Initial uncertainties in recollection become strongly-held beliefs, bed-rock certainties, once we've had time to try to make sense of what happened. Our creativity can sometimes lead us astray. It can happen to the best of us. Even scientists. Please see Christopher Chabris' and Daniel Simons' Invisible Gorilla website for some of this research and especially see Dan Simons' "Counter-Intuition" talk he gave in April 2010. There is a video of his short talk in the video section of Invisible Gorilla in which he gives powerful examples of our perceptions, intuitions, and even the reasoning about our intuition leading even the best of observers astray. That is why scientists lay their results open to the very critical scrutiny of others. And they agree to accept the criticism and re-submit their work when they have improved their argument through better data or give it up when the observations show that their idea does not have merit. They don't blame the "establishment".
So, it is not because scientists just don't want to believe in space aliens that they are critical of the claims of UFOs as aliens, it is because time and time again the methodology of the UFO claims have not followed the high standards of verifiable scientific research. Has every claim of UFOs-as-space aliens been investigated? No. There are so many! It takes more time and energy to figure out the ordinary, natural cause of something than it takes for creative people to imagine fantastic things. Perhaps scientists are a bit too quick to discount UFOs-as-space aliens claims but after years of going down that dead end interpretation of noisy data, can you understand why they might want to devote their time to something more provable?
The next several pages are lengthy excerpts of Sagan's "The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark", published by Ballantine Books (New York) in 1996 (ISBN 0-345-40946-9) . These excerpts are examples of alternative, plausible explanations that "point the other way" from that of space aliens and government cover-ups of space alien invasions. Roswell, New Mexico What follows is an excerpt from Sagan's " The Demon-Haunted World " about the alleged flying saucer crash in Roswell , NM in 1947 (page 84-86).
A great to-do has been made of one or more alleged crashed flying saucers near Roswell, New Mexico, in 1947. Some initial reports and newspaper photographs of the incident are entirely consistent with the idea that the debris was a crashed high-altitude balloon. But other residents of the region—especially decades later—remember more exotic materials, enigmatic hieroglyphics, threats by military personnel to witnesses if they didn't keep what they knew to themselves, and the canonical story that alien machinery and body parts were packed into an airplane and flown to the Air Materiel Command at Wright-Patterson Air force Base. Some, but not all, of the recovered alien body stories are associated with this incident.
Philip Class, a long-time and dedicated UFO skeptic, has uncovered a subsequently declassified letter dated July 27, 1948, a year after the Roswell" incident," from Major General C.B. Cabell—then Director of Intelligence for the U.S. Air Force (and later, as a CIA offical, a major figure in the abortive U.S. invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs). Cabell was inquiring of those who reported to him on what UFOs might be. He hadn't a clue. In an October 11, 1948 summary response, explicitly including information in the possession of the Air Materiel Command, we find the Director of Intelligence being told that nobody else in the Air Force had a clue either. This makes it unlikely that UFO fragments and occupants had made their way to Wright-Patterson the year before.
What the Air Force was mostly worried about was that UFOs were Russian. Why Russians would be testing flying saucers over the United States was a puzzle to which the following four answers were proposed: "(1) To negate U.S. confidence in the atom bomb as the most advanced and decisive weapon in warfare. (2) To perform photographic reconnaissance missions. (3) To test U.S. air defenses. (4) To conduct familiarization flights [for strategic bombers] over U.S. territory." We now know that UFOs neither were or are Russian, and however dedicated the Soviet interest may have been to objectives (1) through (4), flying saucers weren't how they pursued these objectives.
Much of the evidence regarding the Roswell "incident" seems to point to a cluster of high-altitude classified balloons, perhaps launched from nearby Alamogordo Army Air Field or White Sands Proving Ground, that crashed near Roswell, the debris of secret instruments hurriedly collected by earnest military personnel, early press reports announcing that it was a spaceship from another planet ("RAAF Captures Flying Saucer on Ranch in Roswell Region"), diverse recollections simmering over the years, and memories refreshed by the opportunity for a little fame and fortune. (Two UFO museums in Roswell are leading tourist stops.)
A 1994 report ordered by the Secretary of the Air Force and the Department of Defense in response to prodding from a New Mexico Congressman identifies the Roswell debris as remnants of a long-range, highly secret, balloon-borne low-frequency acoustic detection system call "Project Mogul"—an attempt to sense Soviet nuclear weapons explosions at tropopause altitudes. The Air Force investigators, rummaging comprehensively through the secret files of 1947, found no evidence of heightened message traffic:
There were no indications and warnings, notice of alerts, or a higher tempo of operational activity reported that would be logically generated if an alien craft, whose intentions were unknown, entered U.S. territory…The records indicated that none of this happened (or if it did, it was controlled by a security system so efficient and tight that no one, U.S. or otherwise, has been able to duplicate it since. If such a system had been in effect at the time, it would have also been used to protect our atomic secrets from the Soviets, which history has shown obviously was not the case.)
The radar targets carried by the balloons were partly manufactured by novelty and toy companies in New York, whose inventory of decorative icons seems to have been remembered many years later as alien hieroglyphics.
In an earlier passage Sagan notes that balloons were extensively used by the Air Force in the 1950s for various uses including robotic espionage craft, with high-resolution cameras and signal intelligence devices. "High-altitude balloons can seem saucer-shaped when seen from the ground. If you misestimate how far away they are, you can easily imagine them going absurdly fast. Occasionally, propelled by a gust of wind, they make abrupt changes in direction, uncharacteristic of aircraft and in seeming defiance of the conservation of momentum—if you don't realize that they're hollow and weigh almost nothing." (p. 83) Please remember this when you read about reports of alien craft capable of accelerations and sudden changes of trajectory that are impossible with modern aircraft and would create fatal g-forces for humans. Spoofing Another excerpt from Sagan's "The Demon-Haunted World" that gives a plausible explanation of the unknown radar events during the Cold War that were kept under wraps (p. 86-87):
Consider spoofing. In the strategic confrontation between the United states and the Soviet Union, the adequacy of air defenses was a vital issue. It was item (3) on General Cabell's list. If you could find a weakness, it might be the key to "victory" in an all-out nuclear war. The only sure way to test your adversary's defenses is to fly an aircraft over their borders and see how long it takes for them to notice. The United States did this routinely to test Soviet air defenses.
In the 1950s and ‘60s, the United States had state-of-the-art radar defense systems covering its west and east coats, and especially its northern approaches (over which a Soviet bomber or missile attack would most likely come). But there was a soft underbelly—no significant early warning system to detect the geographically much more taxing southern approach. This is of course information vital for a potential adversary. It immediately suggests a spoof: One or more of the adversary's high-performance aircraft zoom out of the Caribbean, let's say, into U.S. airspace, penetrating, let's say, a few hundred miles up the Mississippi River until a U.S. air defense radar locks on. Then the intruders hightail it out of there. (Or, as a control experiment, a unit of U.S. high-performance aircraft is sequestered and sent in unannounced sorties to determine how porous American air defenses are.) In such a case, there may be combined visual and radar sightings by military and civilian observers and large numbers of independent reports. What is reported corresponds to no known aircraft. The Air Force and civilian aviation authorities truthfully state that none their aircraft was responsible. Even if they've been urging Congress to fund a southern Early Warning System, the Air Force is unlikely to admit that Soviet or Cuban aircraft got to New Orleans, much less Memphis, before anybody caught on.
Here again, we have every reason to expect a high-level technical investigating team, Air Force and civilian observers told to keep their mouths shut, and not just the appearance but the reality of suppression of data. Again, this conspiracy of silence need have nothing to do with alien spacecraft. Even decades later, there are bureaucratic reasons for the Department of Defense to be close-mouthed about such embarrassments. There is a potential conflict of interest between parochial concerns of the Department of Defense and the solution of the UFO enigma. Government Conspiracies One last excerpt from Sagan's "The Demon-Haunted World" about oft-lodged charge of the government's conspiracy of silence (p. 92-93). (Any more excerpts and I'll surely be charged with copyright infringement—please read the book for more! Though much lengthier excerpts are available for free on the Google Books version ...)
A cover-up to keep knowledge of extraterrestrial life or alien abductions almost wholly secret for 45 years, with hundreds if not thousands of government employees privy to it, is a remarkable notion. Certainly, government secrets are routinely kept, even secrets of substantial general interest. But the ostensible point of such secrecy is to protect the country and its citizens. Here, though, it's different. The alleged conspiracy of those with security clearances is to keep from the citizens knowledge of a continuing alien assault on the human species. If extraterrestrials really were abducting millions of us, it would be much more than a matter of national security. It would impact the security of all human beings everywhere on Earth. Given such stakes, is it plausible that no one with real knowledge and evidence, in nearly 200 nations, would blow the whistle, speak out and side with the humans rather than the aliens?
Since the end of the Cold War NASA has been flailing about, trying to find missions that justify its existence—particularly a good reason for humans in space. If the Earth were being visited daily by hostile aliens, wouldn't NASA leap on this opportunity to augment is funding? And if an alien invasion were in progress, why would the Air Force, traditionally led by pilots, step back from manned spaceflight and launch all its payloads on unmanned boosters?
Consider the former Strategic Defense Initiative Organization, in charge of "Star Wars." It's fallen on hard times now [in 1996] , particularly its objective of basing defenses in space. Its name and perspective have been demoted. It's the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization these days. It no longer even reports directly the Secretary of Defense. The inability of such technology to protect the United States against a massive attack by nuclear-armed missiles is manifest. But wouldn't we want at least to attempt deployment of defenses in space if we were facing an alien invasion?
The Department of Defense, like similar ministries in every nation, thrives on enemies, real or imagined. It is implausible in the extreme that the existence of such an adversary would be suppressed by the very organization that would most benefit from its presence. The entire post-Cold War posture of the military and civilian space programs of the United States (and other nations) speaks powerfully against the idea that there are aliens among us—unless, of course, the news is also being kept from those who plan the national defense. [No, please don't take the bait dangling in that last sentence…]
Posted by
destiny_of_aries
at
6:49 AM
2
comments
Labels:
news
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
A Brief History of Observing the Sun
A little history of sun-watching and science from our friends at the Solar Dynamics Observatory. Source: Universe Today
Posted by
destiny_of_aries
at
6:15 AM
0
comments
Labels:
news ,
video
Monday, February 7, 2011
Definisi Planet - Mengapa Pluto tidak termasuk kategori Planet?
Mungkin beberapa tahun lalu, jumlah planet yang kita kenal ada 9, yaitu: Merkurius, Venus, Bumi, Mars, Jupiter, Saturnus, Uranus, Neptunus dan Pluto. Namun, tahukah Anda bahwa pada tahun 2006, International Astronomical Union (IAU) telah menentukan definisi planet yang baru. Imbas dari definisi planet yang baru ini sangat besar, karena Pluto yang sudah familiar dikenal sebagai sebuah planet akhirnya harus tersingkir dari "gelar"-nya. Tahukah Anda mengapa Pluto akhirnya "tersingkir"?
Planet, secara etimologis berarti pelancong (wanderer). Pada akhir abad ke-19, istilah Planet sudah menjadi istilah umum, meskipun belum ada batasan yang jelas mengenai kriteria suatu benda yang dapat dianggap sebagai planet. Umumnya, istilah "planet" diberikan kepada objek yang mengitari Matahari dan berukuran lebih besar daripada Pluto.
Setelah tahun 1992, astronomer telah menemukan banyak objek di luar orbit Neptunus (dikenal dengan istilah Trans-Neptunian Objects atau TNO) dan ratusan objek yang mengitari bintang lain (extrasolar planet, lihat artikel sebelumnya). Penemuan ini tidak hanya menambah jumlah dr objek yang potensial disebut planet, tetapi juga memperluas kenaekaragaman dan keanehan (peculiarity) dari objek-objek yang "masuk" kategori planet berdasarkan definisi/pengertian umum. Beberapa objek yang ditemukan tersebut ada yang lebih kecil daripada satelit Bumi, Bulan dan ada juga yang cukup besar untuk menjadi sebuah bintang. Penemuan - penemuan inilah yang membuat astronom merasa adanya kebutuhan untuk menentukan definisi dari sebuah Planet secara jelas agar tidak sembarang objek bisa dianggap sebagai planet.
Plot of the positions of all known Kuiper belt objects (green), set against the outer planets (blue)
Perlunya definisi yang jelas untuk Planet menjadi semakin jelas ketika ditemukannya TNO yang diberi nama Eris . Ukuran Eris lebih besar daripada ukuran Pluto, yang sebelumnya dianggap sebagai ukuran minimum untuk sebuah planet. Oleh sebab itu, pada bulan Agustus 2006, International Astronomical Union (IAU) mengadakan konferensi untuk membuat definisi baru Planet.
Eris as seen with the Hubble Space Telescope
DEFINISI PLANET BERDASARKAN IAU TAHUN 2006
The final definition, as passed on 24 August 2006 under the Resolution 5A of the 26th General Assembly is:
Illustration of the outcome of the vote
The IAU resolves that planets and other bodies, except satellites, in our Solar System be defined into three distinct categories in the following way:
(1) A planet [1] is a celestial body that:
(a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit. (2) A "dwarf planet" is a celestial body that (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape [2], (c) has not cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit, and (d) is not a satellite.
(3) All other objects [3], except satellites, orbiting the Sun shall be referred to collectively as "Small Solar System Bodies".
Footnotes:
[1] The eight planets are: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune.
[2] An IAU process will be established to assign borderline objects into either dwarf planet and other categories.
[3] These currently include most of the Solar System asteroids, most Trans-Neptunian Objects (TNOs), comets, and other small bodies.
The IAU further resolves:
Pluto is a "dwarf planet" by the above definition and is recognized as the prototype of a new category of Trans-Neptunian Objects[1].
Footnote:
[1] An IAU process will be established to select a name for this category.
The IAU also resolved that "planets and dwarf planets are two distinct classes of objects", meaning that dwarf planets, despite their name, would not be considered planets
.
Penjelasan di atas adalah bunyi dari keputusan IAU mengenai definisi Planet yang baru. Secara sederhana, syarat- syarat sebuah objek dapat dikategorikan sebagai planet dalam tata surya ini jika:
mengitari Matahari memiliki massa yang cukup untuk mencapai kondisi k esetimbangan hidrostatis (secara sederhana, objek yang sudah mencapai kondisi kesetimbangan hidrostatis memiliki bentuk bola sempurna). telah " membersihkan objek-objek tetangga " dari orbitnya. atau dengan kata lain, massa Planet adalah massa yang dominan dibandingkan massa seluruh benda lain yang berada di orbit yang sama.
Sebuah objek yang tidak termasuk satelit dan hanya memenuhi dua syarat pertama akan diklasifikasikan sebagai dwarf planet (planet kerdil). Bagi objek yang hanya memenuhi syarat pertama (mengitari Matahari), akan disebut Small Solar System Body (SSSB) atau objek kecil di tata surya. Draft awal merencanakan akan memasukkan dwarf planet sebagai sub-kategori dari planet, tetapi karena keputusan ini akan mengakibatkan penambahan beberapa lusin objek ke dalam tata surya, draft ini dibatalkan. Di tahun 2006, yang termasuk dwarf planet adalah Ceres , Eris , Makemake , dan Pluto . Keputusan ini termasuk keputusan yang kontroversial dan menimbulkan dukungan dan kritik dari cukup banyak astronom, tetapi definisi inilah yang dipakai resmi hingga saat ini.
Jad, berdasarkan definisi yang baru ini, saat ini ada 8 planet yang diakui (Merkurius, Venus, Bumi, Mars, Jupiter, Saturnus, Uranus, dan Neptunus) dan ada lima planet kerdil (Pluto, Ceres, Eris, Makemake, dan Haumea). Definisi ini hanya berlaku untuk Tata Surya kita karena extrasolar Planet belum diketahui dengan jelas/akurat ukurannya. Extrasolar planets atau exoplanets akan didefinisikan dalam referensi lain, yang memisahkan/membedakan exoplanet dan dwarf stars (bintang kerdil).
Pertanyaan evaluasi:
1. Mengapa perlu adanya definisi baru untuk Planet?
2. Jelaskan definisi baru/syarat-syarat sebuah objek dijadikan Planet? Planet Kerdil?
Posted by
destiny_of_aries
at
4:50 PM
1 comments
Labels:
materi ,
news
Older Posts
Home
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Welcome!
This blog is intended for students who want to participate in astronomy competitions and olympiads (OSN, IAO, IOAA, APAO). Tutors and teachers can use this blog as a teaching resource. Amateur astronomers can find this blog useful,too. Its content varies from problem-set, course slide, try out, news, textbook recommendation, astronomy software review, trivia, video, and many more.
All About Astronomy (updates)
Loading...
Diktat Astronomi (Revisi)
Download link
Blog Archive
▼
2020
(1)
▼
March
(1)
Free Astronomy textbook
►
2019
(2)
►
August
(2)
►
2011
(8)
►
March
(2)
►
February
(4)
►
January
(2)
►
2010
(19)
►
December
(1)
►
November
(3)
►
September
(1)
►
May
(2)
►
March
(2)
►
February
(2)
►
January
(8)
►
2009
(50)
►
December
(8)
►
November
(6)
►
October
(2)
►
September
(2)
►
August
(3)
►
June
(3)
►
May
(5)
►
April
(7)
►
March
(6)
►
February
(4)
►
January
(4)
►
2008
(125)
►
December
(5)
►
November
(5)
►
October
(6)
►
September
(18)
►
August
(41)
►
July
(14)
►
June
(36)
Subscribe To
Posts
Atom
Posts
All Comments
Atom
All Comments
Add This
Labels
news
(57)
materi
(48)
soal
(47)
video
(39)
textbook
(17)
event
(12)
trivia
(12)
solusi
(8)
software
(5)
silabus
(3)
Latihan
(2)
book review
(2)
olimpiade
(2)
Sponsored news
(1)
games
(1)
perkenalan
(1)
saran
(1)
Who's online right now
Visitor Locations
Visitors' track (since 18 June 2008)
Some useful links
Astronomy Notes
Nature Of The Universe
Situs IAO
Situs APAO
NASA
NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope
Hubble Site
Informasi tentang planet
International Astronomy Union
Situs Resmi IOAA 1
Situs Resmi IOAA 2 Bandung
IYA2009 Node Indonesia
Moon Phase
moon phases
Group and Community
Click to join olimp_astro
Click to join astronomi_indonesia
Himpunan Astronom Amatir Jakarta (HAAJ)
Followers
APOD
Loading...
Langit Selatan (Weblog Astronomi Indonesia)
Loading...
Space Science
Loading...
Recent articles in Astronomy and Astrophysics
Loading...