Look for Living Planets Near Dying Stars

An astronomer makes the case that the best place to search for habitable planets may be very close to white dwarf stars. Karen Hopkin reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

It’s been nearly 20 years since astronomers first identified a planet outside our solar system. More than 500 exoplanets have been discovered since then, yet it’s not clear if even one of them might be habitable. Now, astronomer Eric Agol at the University of Washington says we’ve been looking in the wrong places. If we want to find planets that could support life, he says we should look at stars that are dying. He floats that suggestion in the Astrophysical Journal Letters. [Eric Agol, "Transit Surveys For Earths In The Habitable Zones Of White Dwarfs"]

White dwarves are the remnants of stars like our sun that start to cool. But they’re still warm enough to keep a planet at a nice cozy temperature…if that planet is close enough. Say, 10 to 100 times closer than Mercury gets to the sun. And that distance is what makes white dwarves so attractive. To astronomers, anyhow. Because a planet that close to its star would dim the dwarf’s light as it passes. The dimming could be detected by even a puny one-meter telescope.

Agol suggests we survey the 20,000 white dwarves closest to Earth. Finding a planet would give us a good place to look for life. Or maybe someday live.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


—Karen Hopkin

[The above text is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe