On Feb 20, 8:40 am, Jeff Findley <jeff.find...@nospam.ugs.com> wrote: > In article <kg29a9$27o...@matchbox.inf.ed.ac.uk>, > rich...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk says... > > > > > In article <3246ca96-d581-45bc-b8b5-25d4ebd07...@j9g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>, > > Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > She states the two have very different orbits so they should be > > >unrelated, but acknowledges that the very low probability of their > > >both occurring so close to each other in time is puzzling. > > > No, it's not puzzling. It would only be puzzling if there was an > > explanation and you couldn't find it. But there isn't an explanation, > > and doesn't need to be. > > This is the definition of a pure coincidence. Nothing special. > > Jeff > --
Nobody has actually looked, officially, for an explanation that doesn't mean one doesn't exist.