> The current hypothesis seems to be that every star has at least one planet I think you mean, that stars have at least one planet on average. E.g. in the unli

> The current hypothesis seems to be that every star has at least one planet I think you mean, that stars have at least one planet on average. E.g. in the unlikely event that only one third of stars had planets, but each one of those stars had on average 3 stars, then it would fit the hypothesis of averaging at least one planet per star. It's not a stretch at all since our rather boring star has at least 8 planets, and of the 4,051 stars we can currently detect with exoplanets, they have a total of 5,438 planets, meaning over 1.34 planets per star not including the unknown but unquestionably vast number of planets we currently don't have the capability of detecting. Still, just as we suspect large numbers of rogue planets that have lost their stars, there must be at least some stars out there that have lost their planets, whether to passing neutron stars or perhaps indigestion. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_exoplanets#:~:text=These%20are%20,systems https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_exoplanets#:~:text=Th...