Astronomy midterm question: possible IAU classification of primordial black hole in Kuiper belt?

Astronomy 210 Midterm 2, fall semester 2019
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

Consider the speculative statements below as factual:

Scientists think the gravitational pull of something in the outer solar system could be yanking Kuiper belt objects into strange orbits. This object is said to have a mass about 10 times that of Earth and an orbit around the sun 20 times farther out than Neptune's. A team of scientists led by Durham University claim it's a primordial black hole about the size and shape of a bowling ball.[*]

Based on the information given in this excerpt, discuss whether or not this "primordial black hole" could be considered a planet, and why. Explain using the International Astronomical Union classification scheme.

[*] Harry Pettit, "Mysterious Planet X May Be Black Hole That's '10 times Heavier than Earth but the Size of a Bowling ball' on Edge of Our Solar System" (September 30, 2019), thesun.co.uk/tech/10032900/planet-x-black-hole-solar-system/.

Solution and grading rubric:

• p:
  Correct. Discusses IAU classification scheme to argue that this primordial black hole would meet each of the qualifications:
  1. orbits the sun directly (20 times farther out than Neptune's orbit);
  2. has a spherical shape (like a bowling ball);
  3. dominates its orbit (gravitationally pulling Kuiper belt objects into strange orbits);
  such that it should be classified as a planet.
• r:
  Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors. May have overlooked or misinterpreted the gravitational influence of this primordial black hole on Kuiper belt objects.
• t:
  Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors. Explicitly lists IAU requirements, but does not apply them correctly/consistently.
• v:
  Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner. Discussion based on garbled definitions of, or not based on proper or complete list of the IAU qualifications.
• x:
  Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. Discussion unrelated to the IAU classification scheme.
• y:
  Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
• z:
  Blank.

Grading distribution:
Section 70158
Exam code: midterm02Rf0w
p: 25 students
r: 8 students
t: 1 student
v: 0 students
x: 0 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

Section 70160
Exam code: midterm02T4qz
p: 15 students
r: 5 students
t: 1 student
v: 1 student
x: 0 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

A sample "p" response (from student 5622):
Another sample "p" response (from student 7890):

Astronomy quiz archive: solar system

Astronomy 210 Quiz 4, fall semester 2019
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

Section 70158, version 1
Exam code: quiz04S3re


Section quiz04S3re

0- 8.0 :	* [low = 6.0]
8.5-16.0 :	***
16.5-24.0 :	******
24.5-32.0 :	******* [mean = 26.5 +/- 8.6]
32.5-40.0 :	************ [high = 36.5]

Section 70160, version 1
Exam code: quiz04NDme


Section 70160

0- 8.0 :	** [low = 6.0]
8.5-16.0 :	***
16.5-24.0 :	****** [mean = 23.5 +/- 8.7]
24.5-32.0 :	********
32.5-40.0 :	**** [high = 36.5]

Astronomy midterm question: possible IAU classification of "cubewano" 2014 MU69?

Astronomy 210 Midterm 2, spring semester 2019
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

A "cubewano" is defined as a Kuiper belt object whose orbit around the sun is not gravitationally controlled by Neptune or other planets[*]. Discuss whether or not a "cubewano" such as 2014 MU₆₉ (nicknamed "Ultima Thule," shown at right[**]) could be considered a dwarf planet, and why. Explain using the International Astronomical Union classification scheme.

[*] wiki.pe/Cubewano.
[**] nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/ultima-thule-1-ca06_022219.png.

Solution and grading rubric:

• p:
  Correct. Discusses IAU classification scheme to argue that 2014 MU₆₉ would meet qualification I (orbits the sun directly), but with its irregular shape would not meet qualification II (rounded shape), and thus be classified as solar system debris. (Note that as a Kuiper belt object, 2014 MU₆₉ does not meet qualification III (dominates its orbit), but this does not affect its solar system debris classification. But may instead interpret 2014 MU₆₉'s shape is "round enough" in order to conclude that it would be classified as a dwarf planet.)
• r:
  Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors.
• t:
  Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors. Explicitly lists IAU requirements, but does not apply them correctly/consistently.
• v:
  Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner. Discussion only tangentially related to the IAU classification scheme.
• x:
  Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. Discussion unrelated to the IAU classification scheme.
• y:
  Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
• z:
  Blank.

Grading distribution:
Section 30676
Exam code: midterm02SpsR
p: 27 students
r: 4 students
t: 5 students
v: 3 students
x: 2 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

A sample "p" response (from student 7563):

Astronomy midterm question: possible IAU classification of "twotino" 2002 WC19?

Astronomy 210 Midterm 2, spring semester 2019
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

A "twotino" is defined as a Kuiper belt object whose orbit around the sun is periodically perturbed by Neptune's gravity[*]. Discuss whether or not a "twotino" such as 
2002 WC₁₉ (shown at right[**], as depicted by an artist) could be considered a dwarf planet, and why. Explain using the International Astronomical Union classification scheme.

[*] wiki.pe/Twotino.
[**] se-database.fandom.com/wiki/2002_WC19.

Solution and grading rubric:

• p:
  Correct. Discusses IAU classification scheme to argue that 2002 WC₁₉ would meet qualification I (orbits the sun directly), and appear to meet qualification II (rounded shape), but does not meet qualification III (dominates its orbit), it would be classified as a dwarf planet.
• r:
  Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors.
• t:
  Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors. Explicitly lists IAU requirements, but does not apply them correctly/consistently.
• v:
  Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner. Discussion only tangentially related to the IAU classification scheme.
• x:
  Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. Discussion unrelated to the IAU classification scheme.
• y:
  Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
• z:
  Blank.

Grading distribution:
Section 30674
Exam code: midterm02nwF7
p: 19 students
r: 1 student
t: 7 students
v: 4 students
x: 2 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

A sample "p" response (from student 2815):

Astronomy quiz archive: solar system

Astronomy 210 Quiz 4, spring semester 2019
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

Section 30674, version 1
Exam code: quiz04n3Ni


Section quiz04n3Ni

0- 8.0 :
8.5-16.0 :	* [low = 9.0]
16.5-24.0 :	*********
24.5-32.0 :	************ [mean = 26.7 +/- 7.1]
32.5-40.0 :	******** [high = 40.0]

Section 30676, version 1
Exam code: quiz04Si3n


Section 30676

0- 8.0 :
8.5-16.0 :	***** [low = 9.5]
16.5-24.0 :	************
24.5-32.0 :	************** [mean = 25.1 +/- 8.4]
32.5-40.0 :	******** [high = 40.0]

Astronomy midterm question: possible IAU classification of "rounded" 2006 RH120?

Astronomy 210 Midterm 2, fall semester 2018
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

2006 RH₁₂₀ (previously known as "6R10DB9") is an object that orbits the sun most of the time, but periodically is caught by Earth's gravity to make several loops around Earth, before returning back to its normal orbit around the sun:

Is 2006 RH₁₂₀ a "second moon?" I'd call it a chunk of rock that orbits the sun almost all the time, spending only a few months orbiting Earth in 2006. It will make passes by us in 2028 and 2044 (at safe distances), and every twenty years or so after that. Eventually, it'll get caught for a few orbits around Earth again, and will almost certainly be ejected again, just as happened this time. 2006 RH₁₂₀ quite likely got where it is as a result of being blasted off the surface of the moon by an impact.[*][**]

In the (unlikely) event that 2006 RH₁₂₀ is found to have a rounded shape, discuss how it should be classified when it is in its usual orbit around the sun. Explain using the International Astronomical Union classification scheme.

[*] projectpluto.com/pluto/mpecs/6r1.htm.
[**] Illustration credit: Gregg Dinderman, skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/earths-other-moon/.

Solution and grading rubric:

• p:
  Correct. Discusses IAU classification scheme to argue that 2006 RH₁₂₀ when in its usual orbit around the sun would pass qualification I (orbits the sun directly), and with a presumably (however unlikely) rounded shape would pass qualification II (rounded shape), but as it is periodically captured by Earth's gravity 2006 RH₁₂₀ does not dominate its orbit, and thus would presumably be classified as a dwarf planet.
• r:
  Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors.
• t:
  Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors. Explicitly lists IAU requirements, but does not apply them correctly/consistently.
• v:
  Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner. Discussion only tangentially related to the IAU classification scheme.
• x:
  Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. Discussion unrelated to the IAU classification scheme.
• y:
  Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
• z:
  Blank.

Grading distribution:
Section 70158
Exam code: midterm02SYnR
p: 29 students
r: 0 students
t: 0 students
v: 4 students
x: 0 students
y: 1 student
z: 1 student

Section 70160
Exam code: midterm02NdI0
p: 6 students
r: 2 students
t: 6 students
v: 3 students
x: 1 student
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

A sample "p" response (from student 4073):

Astronomy midterm question: plausible IAU classification of 300163 (2006 VW139) before breaking apart?

Astronomy 210 Midterm 2, fall semester 2017
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

An international team of astronomers recently discovered two asteroids with comet-like features orbiting each other in the asteroid belt:

NASA's Hubble Space Telescope helped an international team of astronomers find that an unusual object in the asteroid belt, designated 300163 (2006 VW139), is in fact two asteroids of almost the same mass and size, orbiting each other at a distance of 60 miles. They also have comet-like features, including a bright halo of material, called a coma, and a long tail of dust. Roughly 5,000 years ago, 300163 (2006 VW139) probably broke into these two pieces due to a fast rotation.[*]

Before it broke apart 5,000 years ago, discuss how 300163 (2006 VW139) might have been originally classified, using the International Astronomical Union classification scheme. Clearly state your assumptions about what properties 300163 (2006 VW139) might have had before it broke apart.

[*] J. Agarwal, "Comet or Asteroid? Hubble Discovers that a Unique Object is a Binary," hubblesite.org/news_release/news/2017-32.

Solution and grading rubric:

• p:
  Correct. Discusses IAU classification scheme to argue that before breaking up 5,000 years ago:
  1. 300163 (2006 VW139) was in the asteroid belt, orbiting the sun, and thus could not have been a moon; and not having been able to gravitationally dominate its orbit by clearing asteroids out or pulling in asteroids into itself, could not have have been a planet (assuming that it had a rounded shape); and
  2. depending on whether its shape was irregular or rounded, it would have either been classified as solar system debris or a dwarf planet.
• r:
  Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors. May have instead discussed how the two components of 300163 (2006 VW139) today could be categorized in terms of the IAU classification scheme, instead of how it might have been categorized before breaking up 5,000 years ago.
• t:
  Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors. Explicitly lists IAU requirements, but does not apply them correctly/consistently.
• v:
  Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner. Discussion only tangentially related to the IAU classification scheme.
• x:
  Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. Discussion unrelated to the IAU classification scheme.
• y:
  Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
• z:
  Blank.

Grading distribution:
Section 70158
Exam code: midterm02Sm5n
p: 35 students
r: 4 students
t: 5 students
v: 2 students
x: 0 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

Section 70160
Exam code: midterm02nJv3
p: 23 students
r: 5 students
t: 3 students
v: 0 students
x: 0 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

A sample "p" response (from student 0987):
Another sample "p" response (from student 1796):
A sample "r" response (from student 1881), discussing the current classification of 300163 (2006 VW139) today:

Astronomy quiz archive: solar system

Astronomy 210 Quiz 4, fall semester 2017
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

Section 70158, version 1
Exam code: quiz04S4pR


Section 70158

0- 8.0 :
8.5-16.0 :
16.5-24.0 :	****** [low = 18.5]
24.5-32.0 :	******************* [mean = 30.7 +/- 5.8]
32.5-40.0 :	***************** [high = 40.0]

Section 70160, version 1
Exam code: quiz04N3rn


Section 70160

0- 8.0 :
8.5-16.0 :	* [low = 12.0]
16.5-24.0 :	***
24.5-32.0 :	************* [mean = 30.4 +/- 6.8]
32.5-40.0 :	************ [high = 40.0]

Astronomy midterm question: plausible AMNH classification of Ceres and asteroids?

Astronomy 210 Midterm 2, spring semester 2017
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

An astronomer at the American Museum of Natural History proposed an alternate scheme for defining planets and non-planets[*]:

A planet is (1) a body that has swept up or scattered most of the material from its orbit around the sun, and (2) has an orbit that can never collide with another planet. A non-planet is (1) a body that has not swept up or scattered most of the material from its orbit around the sun, and (2) has an orbit that can collide with either a planet or another non-planet.

Discuss how Ceres could be considered a planet under these new rules, but the asteroids would not. Explain your answer using these new rules, and characteristics of Ceres and of the asteroids.

[*] Steven Soter, "What is a Planet?" The Astronomical Journal, vol. 132, pp. 2513-2519 (August 16, 2006), arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0608359.pdf. (As discussed in this article, however, Ceres would still not be considered a planet with this new scheme.)

Solution and grading rubric:

• p:
  Ceres is a dwarf planet that is rounded in shape and is much larger than the remainder of the asteroids, which are much smaller and are irregular in shape. Since Ceres is much larger, it can be argued that (1) if it "swept up most of the material from its orbit," and (2) since it can only collide with asteroids in its orbit, and thus can be considered a planet under these two rules. Since the asteroids are much smaller, it can be argued that (1) they did not sweep up most of the material from their orbits, and (2) are in orbits that can collide with each other or with Ceres, classifying them as non-planets.
• r:
  Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors. At least discusses three of the four points above.
• t:
  Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors. Explicitly discusses the AMNH rules, but does not apply them correctly/consistently/completely, typically only Ceres or only asteroids, or only the first or second criteria to both.
• v:
  Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner. Discussion only tangentially related to the AMNH rules.
• x:
  Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. Discussion unrelated to the AMNH rules.
• y:
  Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
• z:
  Blank.

Grading distribution:
Section 30674
Exam code: midterm02nDcc
p: 13 students
r: 2 students
t: 5 students
v: 1 student
x: 0 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

Section 30676
Exam code: midterm02sL0w
p: 28 students
r: 7 students
t: 5 students
v: 3 students
x: 0 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

A sample "p" response (from student 1515):

Astronomy quiz archive: solar system

Astronomy 210 Quiz 4, spring semester 2017
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

Section 30674, version 1
Exam code: quiz04nqyL


Section 30674

0- 8.0 :
8.5-16.0 :	****** [low = 12.0]
16.5-24.0 :	****** [mean = 23.6 +/- 7.7]
24.5-32.0 :	*******
32.5-40.0 :	**** [high = 36.5]

Section 30676, version 1
Exam code: quiz04sl4M


Section 30676

0- 8.0 :	* [low = 7.0]
8.5-16.0 :	********
16.5-24.0 :	************** [mean = 22.9 +/- 7.8]
24.5-32.0 :	*********
32.5-40.0 :	******* [high = 36.5]

Astronomy midterm question: provisional IAU classification of 2014 UZ224?

Astronomy 210 Midterm 2, fall semester 2016
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

Solar system object 2014 UZ224 was recently discussed in the news[*]:

Scientists have discovered a new object orbiting the sun in the Kuiper belt, called 2014 UZ224, which measures about 330 miles across. The smallest object in the solar system that has earned the title of "dwarf planet" (prior to this new discovery) is Ceres, which lies in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter. Ceres is 590 miles across. The object 2014 UZ224 might not be a dwarf planet, but that will have to be decided by the International Astronomical Union.

Discuss why 2014 UZ224 may not qualify as a dwarf planet. Explain using the International Astronomical Union classification scheme.

[*] Calla Cofield, "New Dwarf Planet Found in Our Solar System" (October 12, 2016), scientificamerican.com/article/new-dwarf-planet-found-in-our-solar-system/.

Solution and grading rubric:

• p:
  Of the three IAU requirements (orbits the sun directly, has a rounded shape, cleared/dominates its orbit), a dwarf planet satisfies the first two. Since UZ224 orbits the sun, in the Kuiper belt (satisfying the first and third requirement), in order to not be classified as a dwarf planet, UZ224 must not be so large that its shape has been rounded (which would classify it as solar system debris).
• r:
  Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors. Understands how IAU requirements apply in correctly arguing how UZ224 would not be classified as a dwarf planet, but discussion of requirements is not explicit, or only implied, or contains extraneous information.
• t:
  Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors. Explicitly lists IAU requirements, but does not apply them correctly/consistently.
• v:
  Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner. Discussion only tangentially related to the IAU classification scheme.
• x:
  Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. Discussion unrelated to the IAU classification scheme.
• y:
  Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
• z:
  Blank.

Grading distribution:
Section 70158
Exam code: midterm02sU6A
p: 30 students
r: 3 students
t: 3 students
v: 5 students
x: 0 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

Section 70160
Exam code: midterm02NbnW
p: 23 students
r: 0 students
t: 1 student
v: 0 students
x: 0 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

A sample "p" response (from student 0022):

Astronomy quiz archive: solar system

Astronomy 210 Quiz 4, fall semester 2016
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

Section 70158, version 1
Exam code: quiz04s5ie


Section 70158

0- 8.0 :	* [low = 8.0]
8.5-16.0 :	*********
16.5-24.0 :	************** [mean = 20.6 +/- 6.6]
24.5-32.0 :	*******
32.5-40.0 :	** [high = 36.0]

Section 70160, version 1
Exam code: quiz04n4uG


Section 70160

0- 8.0 :	* [low = 8.0]
8.5-16.0 :	******
16.5-24.0 :	********** [mean = 21.3 +/- 6.4]
24.5-32.0 :	********** [high = 32.0]
32.5-40.0 :

Astronomy quiz archive: solar system

Astronomy 210 Quiz 4, spring semester 2016
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

Section 30674, version 1
Exam code: quiz04nG4N


Section 30674

0- 8.0 :	* [low = 4.0]
8.5-16.0 :	****
16.5-24.0 :	******* [mean = 21.6 +/- 7.7]
24.5-32.0 :	******
32.5-40.0 :	* [high = 36.5]

Section 30676, version 1
Exam code: quiz04stP7


Section 30676

0- 8.0 :
8.5-16.0 :	*** [low = 12.0]
16.5-24.0 :	*********************** [mean = 24.9 +/- 6.9]
24.5-32.0 :	************
32.5-40.0 :	*********** [high = 40.0]

Astronomy midterm question: Star Wars "That's no moon..." analysis

Astronomy 210 Midterm 2, fall semester 2015
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

In the movie Star Wars (20th Century Fox, 1977), the Death Star was a giant spherical traveling space station that was initially mistaken as a "small moon." In the webcomic panel at right[*] it is further argued that the Death Star is "too small to be a moon." Discuss why the Death Star cannot be considered a moon, despite its small size. Explain using the International Astronomical Union classification scheme.

[*] Randall Munroe, "Small Moon," xkcd.com/1458/.

Solution and grading rubric:

• p:
  Correct. Of the three IAU requirements (orbits the sun directly, has a rounded shape, cleared/dominates its orbit), if an object does not orbit the sun (or presumably any star) directly, but orbits a planet, then it is classified as a moon/satellite. Since the Death Star can travel through space, then it would not be a moon/satellite while it is not in orbit around a planet.
• r:
  Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors. May argue that the Death Star is not a moon because it does not orbit the sun (when the IAU classification scheme asks whether the object directly orbits the sun, or is in orbit around another object such as a planet), but understands the importance of the first classification question.
• t:
  Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors. May also involve the shape of the Death Star and/or its ability to gravitationally dominate other objects as important, other than its orbiting another object in orbit around the sun (or any star).
• v:
  Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner. Discussion only tangentially related to the IAU classification scheme.
• x:
  Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. Discussion unrelated to the IAU classification scheme.
• y:
  Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
• z:
  Blank.

Grading distribution:
Section 70160
Exam code: midterm02n1N0
p: 16 students
r: 9 students
t: 5 students
v: 1 student
x: 0 students
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

A sample "p" response (from student 7063), also sharing tangentially personal opinions on Star Wars:

Astronomy midterm question: new two-rule planet classification rules

Astronomy 210 Midterm 2, fall semester 2015
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

An astronomer at the Southwest Research Institute in Boulder, CO proposed an alternate scheme[*] for defining a planet, paraphrased here as:

Rule 1: Must be small enough that it is not a star.
Rule 2: Must also be large enough that it formed itself into a spherical shape.

Discuss one example of something in our solar system that is currently not a planet according to the International Astronomical Union that would now be considered a planet under this new two-rule scheme. Explain using both the International Astronomical Union classification scheme, and this new two-rule scheme.

[*] Mark W. Buie, "Definition of a Planet," boulder.swri.edu/~buie/pluto/planetdefn.html.

Solution and grading rubric:

• p:
  Correct. Selects a round object such as a dwarf planet (such a Ceres, or Pluto) or the moon that is not a planet (due to not dominating its orbit around the sun; or because it does not orbit the sun directly), and shows that these objects would be considered a planet under the new two-rule scheme, as they would be small enough to not be a star, and also be rounded in the shape.
• r:
  Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors.
• t:
  Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors.
• v:
  Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner. Discussion only tangentially related to the IAU classification scheme.
• x:
  Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. Discussion unrelated to the IAU classification scheme.
• y:
  Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank.
• z:
  Blank.

Grading distribution:
Section 70158
Exam code: midterm02sP3c
p: 18 students
r: 4 students
t: 11 students
v: 0 students
x: 1 student
y: 0 students
z: 0 students

A sample "p" response (from student 3695) discussing how a dwarf planet such as Pluto or Ceres would then be considered a planet:
A sample "p" response (from student 1022) discussing how the moon would then be considered a planet:

Astronomy quiz archive: solar system

Astronomy 210 Quiz 4, fall semester 2015
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

Section 70158, version 1
Exam code: quiz04s7Rn


Section 70158

0- 8.0 :
8.5-16.0 :	*** [low = 8.5]
16.5-24.0 :	***********
24.5-32.0 :	************* [mean = 26.8 +/- 8.0]
32.5-40.0 :	************* [high = 40.0]

Section 70160, version 1
Exam code: quiz04nVL7


Section 70160

0- 8.0 :	* [low = 8.0]
8.5-16.0 :	*****
16.5-24.0 :	********** [mean = 22.6 +/- 6.9]
24.5-32.0 :	**********
32.5-40.0 :	* [high = 33.0]

Astronomy quiz archive: solar system

Astronomy 210 Quiz 4, spring semester 2015
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

Section 30674, version 1
Exam code: quiz04NoR3


Section 30674

0- 8.0 :
8.5-16.0 :	******* [low = 12.0]
16.5-24.0 :	*************** [mean = 23.5 +/- 6.6]
24.5-32.0 :	***********
32.5-40.0 :	***** [high = 36.5]

Section 30676, version 1
Exam code: quiz04s0U7


Section 30676

0- 8.0 :	* [low = 8.0]
8.5-16.0 :	**********
16.5-24.0 :	************** [mean = 24.4 +/- 8.6]
24.5-32.0 :	************
32.5-40.0 :	********** [high = 40.0]

Astronomy quiz archive: solar system

Astronomy 210 Quiz 4, fall semester 2014
Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA

Section 70158, version 1
Exam code: quiz04s4tR


Section 70158

0- 8.0 :	* [low = 4.0]
8.5-16.0 :	*****
16.5-24.0 :	***********
24.5-32.0 :	******************** [mean = 25.2 +/- 7.8]
32.5-40.0 :	******* [high = 40]

Section 70160, version 1
Exam code: quiz04n33P


Section 70160

0- 8.0 :	* [low = 4.0]
8.5-16.0 :	*
16.5-24.0 :	*******
24.5-32.0 :	**************** [mean = 28.1 +/- 7.3]
32.5-40.0 :	********** [high = 40]