https://briankoberlein.com/2015/01/29/old-ones/ Brian Koberlein Fri, 22 Feb 2019 18:22:15 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.1 https://briankoberlein.com/2015/01/29/old-ones/#comment-1993 Tue, 24 Feb 2015 14:38:11 +0000 https://briankoberlein.com/?p=4434#comment-1993 Capturing a dust cloud or planets would be unlikely. Much of the cloud would also fall into the star, changing its spectrum.

]]> https://briankoberlein.com/2015/01/29/old-ones/#comment-1989 Tue, 24 Feb 2015 04:07:26 +0000 https://briankoberlein.com/?p=4434#comment-1989 What about the possibility that the star was there for a long while (a few billion years), and then later debris from “nearby” supernovae formed the planets — essentially, the planets could have formed from dust clouds that the star captured? Would the star just have incorporated the dust clouds into itself if that were the case, instead of the dust cloud having time to form into planets? Could this “dust cloud capture” hypothesis explain the closeness of their orbits?

]]> https://briankoberlein.com/2015/01/29/old-ones/#comment-1872 Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:56:27 +0000 https://briankoberlein.com/?p=4434#comment-1872 We aren’t entirely sure, but they are really close to the star, and seem to be in stable orbits. The chance of capture is fairly low.

]]> https://briankoberlein.com/2015/01/29/old-ones/#comment-1871 Fri, 30 Jan 2015 07:05:21 +0000 https://briankoberlein.com/?p=4434#comment-1871 How do we know that these five objects actually formed around this star? It seems more likely that they formed elsewhere at a more appropreiate time–and place– in the history of the Universe and then were captured by Kepler-444?

]]>