Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site decwrl.DEC.COM
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-ocala!fisher
From: fisher@ocala.DEC (Burns Fisher ZKO1-1/D42 DTN 381-1466)
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: New planet formation theory
Message-ID: <407@decwrl.DEC.COM>
Date: Mon, 13-Jan-86 09:09:11 EST
Article-I.D.: decwrl.407
Posted: Mon Jan 13 09:09:11 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 15-Jan-86 07:54:27 EST
Sender: daemon@decwrl.DEC.COM
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 21

I read this weekend (Boston Globe?; possibly Space World) about a new
theory of the formation of planets which is sufficiently precise to allow
the prediction of planetary locations as well as those of their satellites.
The article said that the theorist, an Australian, had made a number of 
predictions about Uranus based on the theory.  The first of these, a prediction 
of the existance and location of a previously unknown Uranian satellite, has
been confirmed by Voyager II.  Several others will be confirmed or denied
over the next few weeks.  The article says that if this theory holds up
it will be a great shock to the scientific community.

Does anyone know anything about this?  Is it for real?  The article says
that the theory agrees with the current known planetary system.  But what
does the theory have to say about the asteroid belt, Deimos/Phobos, Pluto,
and trans-Plutonian planets?

Thanks for any info.

Burns

		...decwrl!rhea!star!fisher