Should Modern Astrologers Accept the Names Given to Newly Discovered Celestial Objects by Astronomers with No Interest in Astrology Itself? I trust the older ones, which include the three Outermosts (with a slight disagreement concerning the Latinization of the Greeks' Ouranos to get a non-Classical name "Uranus" never in use by Greece or Rome); also, Ceres. Not sure about Chiron though. Chiron iS a highly unusual Comet/Asteroid hybrid which shot its way into a stable orbit around our Sun. That makes it significant, Chiron its correct name? If they'd named it "Achilles", for example, we'd be using it find our "Achilles heel", which is sort of what Chiron is being used for.