Not exact matches
Only rocky, sturdy
planets could form
nearby; giant
planets would form farther out, where ices and cool gases could gather together.
The
only technique we have at present for detecting the planetary systems of
nearby stars is the study of the gravitational perturbations such
planets induce in the motion of their parent star.
Well, it's the year 2029 (implausibility # 1: call me a pessimist, but space travel seems far too advanced in this film to believe that the year will be
only a generation ahead of us... oh well) and a space station close to a
nearby uninhabited
planet sends off a chimpanzee in a space pod to do some stuff (it's not clear exactly what) and when feared lost, his bestest human buddy Leo Davidson (Marky Mark, The Perfect Storm) gets in a pod of his own and goes in after him.
Considering that players will
only get some general information for
planets that can not be explored directly unless an anomaly is detected
nearby, very few will be able to stomach checking all of them out.
For your analogy to hold, you are arguing that a hypothetical Star Trek near - instantaneous scanning will take place on the complete assembled structure, of complete depth at a very fine resolution No,
only for the things that are relevant, which for a star or the Sun are
only its mass, composition, and age [and to second order if it is part of a binary star or has giant
nearby planets — but since none of those things apply to the Sun we can ignore them].