3 ms·
We were wrong: all stars don’t have planets, after all
- tempxyz 4y agohttps://images.app.goo.gl/nGaZnK78QrtHPZQc8 https://images.app.goo.gl/nGaZnK78QrtHPZQc8
- 2intensely 4y agoDid anyone ever say ALL stars have planets? But anyway, MOST stars probably DO have planets! And no, 99.9% of planets confirmed by NASA are not orbiting high metallicity stars, that's nonsense. Stars with more than 1.5 times the metallicity of our Sun* host only around 16% of planets discovered and confirmed. At least according to NASA's Exoplanet Archive. see - https://exoplanetarchive.ipac.caltech.edu/cgi-bin/TblView/nph-tblView?app=ExoTbls&config=PS https://exoplanetarchive.ipac.caltech.edu/cgi-bin/TblView/np... - And then under the column headed Stellar Metallicity [dex] put in ">=0.176" *The average metallicity of the stars in Kepler's Field of View was about the same as our Sun, very slightly lower 90%, so a small percentage of low metallicity stars to begin with.