Charles Liu

We don't have enough information to know whether or not that's a fruitful path, so to speak, for entanglement.

Well, subspace is only vaguely determined, decided or defined in Star Trek, right?

Yeah, exactly.

But yes, if you're in a, it could be a warp drive or something like that, right?

And you are in subspace as a result of being in a warp bubble, right?

That could be considered a dimension, right?

Or it could be considered something that is in the existing spatial dimensions that just happens to be temporarily not accessible.

And yet you have subspace communications in Star Trek, so it is accessible, and it's just all kinds of weirdness.

Correct.

Well, that's one of the interesting things between Star Trek and Star Wars, right?

I love them both, but even though Star Trek has tried to be much more scientific...

Star Wars just gave up on being scientific.

Star Wars is just a space opera.

And so in that sense, it's actually still kind of fun.

Although things like the Mandalorian and so forth, they still have a little bit of science thrown in there.

The ideas in general of things like the Force and whatnot in Star Wars, eh, not so much.

This is another great question.

Thank you, Cindy.

And in fact, this is a question that I was asked like exactly word for word.

when I was at the American Astronomical Society meeting back in January.