Hi again, Hilmar, and thanks for the reply.

>I read in some older book about the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter.
>While there were some theories about a destroyed planet, it seems that most
>astronomers (at that time) thought it likely that a planet didn't form in the
>first place, because gravitational interference of massive Jupiter.
>
>Judging by some articles I am just reading on the Wikipedia, it seems the
>"Phaeton (or Phaethon) hypothesis" (the hypothesis of a destroyed planet)
>is not generally accepted nowadays. From "Asteroid belt": "...A key problem
>with such an hypothesis is the staggering amount of energy required to achieve
>this kind of effect."

Hmmm. Personally, I don't think I agree with this particular Wiki. Maybe
I should go and edit it or something :^).

>Pressumably, such a planet destruction could be explained
>by a civilization with technology much more advanced than ours,
>but not by usual astronomical events.

Ok. I'll go over and take a look, but I still say that I'm right,
and I'm still willing to be all comers that I'll be proven correct
in the not-too-distant future -- say, two years.
Wager: The cost of a VFP upgrade :^) :^) :^).

>Articles consulted:
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_belt
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaeton_(planet)

Thanks a ton, Hilmar. I'll give it a look.

Best Regards,

Randall