quote:
Originally posted by capnq:
It seems to me that a "half-bell" peaking at Tiny would be more "realistic". The bigger a planet is, the less likely it is to have formed in the first place.
Hmmm...it all depends on how you believe that planets are formed doesn't it? If a star system is formed by a catastrophic event, wouldn't you say that the size of the chunks would be random? Also, in a given star system, at inception, wouldn't you say that the smaller chunks were the ones most likely to be sucked back into the sun? Now, I'm not really an astronomer or a physicist (which is painfully evident to those who are
) but only working from a point of logic, and, thusly, it seems to me that the tiny planets would be fewer than the medium ones....I invite counter-views
------------------
Spyder, Chairman of the Arachnid Consortium