What? What are you on about? One of the items on the docket for the 2006 assembly was the clarification of the definition of a planet because there wasn't one. It wasn't an issue if vaguery, there was NO definition.
This was prompted buy the discovery of Eris, as described in the image above.
The definition they made was vague. "A 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, and (c) has cleared the neighborhood around its orbit." That is the definition they came up with. The problem with it is the last line. Pluto is in the Kuiper belt so it has not cleared its orbit. Eris is in the asteroid belt so it has not cleared its orbit. By the same definition the IAU came up with in 2006 Earth, Jupiter, Neptune, and Mars would also have to be demoted to dwarf planet because these planets have not cleared their orbits of various debris. So are you trying to say Earth, Jupiter, Neptune, and Mars are dwarf planets too? Another problem is that we have discovered "planet" that have lost its star and is just flying through space. By the IAU's definition this isnt a planet but we still treat it as such.
These problems with the 2006 definition have prompted Nasa to propose a new definition. http://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2017/pdf/1448.pdf
It states that a planet should be orbiting our Sun, not other stars or ones without stars.
It gets rid of the issue that planets must clear their orbits.
And lastly they proposed that a"zone" should be mathematically found to judge if a celestial object is distance dependent and not just some random object in the sky.
Actually, if the Definition of a planet included Dwarf Planets and other similar bodies, we'd have 100+ technical planets in our solar system, SciShow did a video about it
This was prompted buy the discovery of Eris, as described in the image above.
It states that a planet should be orbiting our Sun, not other stars or ones without stars.
It gets rid of the issue that planets must clear their orbits.
And lastly they proposed that a"zone" should be mathematically found to judge if a celestial object is distance dependent and not just some random object in the sky.
This system of ours could have been 15+ planets.