Monday, May 4, 2026
Contact    |    RSS icon Twitter icon Facebook icon  
Unexplained Mysteries Support Us
You are viewing: Home > News > Space & Astronomy > News story
Welcome Guest ( Login or Register )  
All ▾
Search Submit

Space & Astronomy

Planets like Tatooine with two suns may be the norm, study finds

By T.K. Randall
May 1, 2026 · Comment icon 5 comments
Desert sands
Image: AI-generated (Midjourney)
It's easy to take it for granted that our own solar system, with one star, is the norm - but it turns out that this may not be the case.
According to a new study, solar systems with two or more stars may actually be more efficient at producing planets than single-star systems, meaning that planets such as Tatooine in Star Wars may be more commonplace that planets like the Earth with only one.

For years, it was believed that systems with more than one star were too chaotic for planets to form, but now it seems that this is only true of the inner parts of such systems, not the outer parts.

For the study, lead author Matthew Teasdale of the University of Lancashire, and colleagues, used computer simulations to model the protoplanetary discs of multi-star systems.
The inner region too unstable for planetary formation was designated "the danger zone".

"What we're finding is that [multi-star systems] can actually be extremely productive," said Teasdale.

"Once you get past the danger zone, planets can form quickly and in large numbers."

The findings help to solve the mystery of how planets can form in such systems despite the turbulent conditions.

Source: Space.com | Comments (5)




Other news and articles
Our latest videos Visit us on YouTube
Recent comments on this story
Comment icon #1 Posted by L.A.T.1961 2 days ago
They probably are and if so it does not help the likelihood of intelligent life developing elsewhere.
Comment icon #2 Posted by Earl.Of.Trumps 2 days ago
I'm not sire about that, LAT, they make many more planets than mono solar systems. "Once you get past the danger zone, planets can form quickly and in large numbers." The more planets, the more chances at life. 
Comment icon #3 Posted by Tom1200 2 days ago
Why is this non-story being promoted with an "AI generated" image of some sand dunes?  Is that really necessary or useful?  Why not take the extra two seconds to instruct "show me a desert landscape with two suns of different size and colour"? Three "may"s in the first 60 words doesn't exactly fill me with confidence. The linked article https://www.space.com/ suggests that the majority of these planets are gas giants, which makes sense as they'd be built from lighter elements and compounds pushed away by the combined solar wind.  What's your opinion on life evolving on such planets, compar... [More]
Comment icon #4 Posted by L.A.T.1961 2 days ago
A two star system would be inherently more unstable for planetary orbits which I think would restrict life having a chance to develop?  Planets could have a lot less time in a goldilocks zone. 
Comment icon #5 Posted by Earl.Of.Trumps 1 day ago
I don't think there would be much of a chance for life to evolve on a gas giant, but live would thrive on a rocky planet.MO


Please Login or Register to post a comment.


Our new book is out now!
Book cover

The Unexplained Mysteries
Book of Weird News

 AVAILABLE NOW 

Take a walk on the weird side with this compilation of some of the weirdest stories ever to grace the pages of a newspaper.

Click here to learn more

We need your help!
Patreon logo

Support us on Patreon

 BONUS CONTENT 

For less than the cost of a cup of coffee, you can gain access to a wide range of exclusive perks including our popular 'Lost Ghost Stories' series.

Click here to learn more

Top 10 trending mysteries
Recent news and articles