The way I read this article, it rather reinforces the Copernican principle. There are 3 facts in the article. 1. Planets in other systems tend to orbit faster

The way I read this article, it rather reinforces the Copernican principle. There are 3 facts in the article. 1. Planets in other systems tend to orbit faster, in a matter of weeks rather than years; therefore our system is special. Fine, this observation would go against the Copernican principle, but my guess is it's more likely to be an observation bias. Namely, if you have many transitions, before doing any math, you can't tell if it's one or several planets. If you have 10 planets, and you wrongly assume it's one, you get an perceived orbital speed that is 10 times higher (oversimplifying here a bit). If you do the math, and are able to tell apart some of the transitions, you may still think you only have 3 planets instead of 10. Identifying if transitions belong to the same planet is likely to have few false negatives but many false positives. We can follow this space, and see if future analyses confirm the current findings, or confirm my hunch. 2. Distribution of densities. Here the article mentions that for a given radius the density can vary by a factor of 10, but otherwise there is nothing special about the Earth. I would call this a plus for the Copernican principle 3. The distribution of planet sizes. This one is double peaked, and the size of the Earth is part of one peak, not of the valley. This is a big plus for the Copernican principle.