On Feb 23, 3:07*pm, Thomas wrote:

A simple order of magnitude calculation shows that even with a free
floating planet density twice the stellar density (as suggested by the
references you quoted), the chance of a star capturing a planet in its
lifetime is practically zero:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One of the papers determines the probability of "nomad" capture by a
star would be in the 3% to 5% range. The paper notes that 3-5% is not
a high probability, but in the relevant star clusters, typically
containing on the order of 1,000 stars, this represents a significant
number of captured planets.

Any mathematical calculation used to approximate what actually happens
in nature is only as good as the assumptions it starts with. If one
or more critical assumptions is wrong, then the mathematical results
can seriously mislead and give wrong "answers".

I previously gave a simple and very strong observational argument for
the possibility that planet capture was reasonably common, but the
post was rejected as "too speculative" since it involved an analogy to
atomic scale systems.

[Mod. note:... which meant it was not either a strong or an
observational argument. -- mjh]

I think we are going to have to modify many of our set-in-stone
assumptions regarding stellar and exoplanet systems. Observations
have and will continue to demand it.

RLO
http://www3.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw
Discrete Scale Relativity
Faster-than-light neutrinos? "In a pig's eye!"