Originally Posted by tusenfem

After reading the paper, I still fail to see the significance after the papers by Graner and Dubrulle. Although a nice little result, it is a paper that tells 2 + 2 = 4, but why this is is left untouched.

Secondly, the reason for not assuming Mercury as one of the planets to make the new exponential TB law seems totally superfluous, no reason is given for it, apart from the original TB law also did not use this planet. Does not sound like a real reason to me. And if you have to do this, why not leave out the first planet in the 55 Cancri system?