Talk:Stellar engineering

Who wrote this?
Are you called Duncan?88.66.17.47 (talk) 21:51, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Seems to violate the crystal ball policy
As written, this article seems to violate the policy against gleaning content from a crystal ball. It may be true that a significant number of science fiction writers assume the capability to do "stellar engineering". If they use the term, then an article stressing that context may be appropriate.

The statement that "humanity does not _yet_ possess the technological ability ..." suggests that we will someday. I am aware of no credible suggestions that the god-like power to manipulate stars will be within our — or E.T.'s — grasp. We have been trying for decades, without success, to create the smallest of "stars" in a fusion reactor. The amount of "leveraging" needed for a planet-based life form to make a star big enough to put planets around would be ... astronomical.

It is entertaining to watch the hero detect and correct stellar instabilities — all within the same hour of TV. But presenting it as a realistic future branch of engineering seems erroneous to me. Certainly, such an assertion is not verifiable.- Ac44ck (talk) 22:09, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Doctor Who
The article says:


 * The Tardis, the ship The Doctor (a renegade Time Lord) flies is actually built around and thus contains an artificially created star, providing the power needed to travel through time and space. "It's bigger on the inside"

This seems to be based on a misunderstanding of the 2013 episode _Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS_. While the characters do see a star (or, likely, a representation of a mathematical model of a star) inside the TARDIS in that episode, that star is never said to be an artificially created star, or to provide the power to travel through time and space, and if you wanted to engage in OR based on what's been said in multiple previous and later stories, that isn't even a very good guess. Also, "It's bigger on the inside" isn't attributed to anyone here (although of course multiple people have said it over the course of the series), and it isn't relevant. And TARDIS is always spelled in all caps (see the Wikipedia article [TARDIS]), and there are multiple punctuation errors. But these are less important; since the whole thing is unverifiable (and probably wrong), I'm going to remove it. --157.131.246.136 (talk) 19:20, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

I left behind the "See Also" link to [Doctor Who], because I don't know the Wikipedia guidelines on these "See Also" sections. The Doctor Who article doesn't (and probably shouldn't) actually have much to say about stellar engineering—but the same is true for most of the other See Also links on this page, so maybe that isn't important? There is certainly plenty of stellar engineering in the background of Doctor Who (artificially turning a star into a black hole, removing live singularities from black holes, …). --157.131.246.136 (talk) 19:27, 20 April 2019 (UTC)