Q:

VTC on an old question that would now be "Not Constructive"

This is the question in question:  How does the theory of subspace work?
Normally, I'd expect this to be a Star Trek question, and have no issue with it.  Then I saw that star-trek isn't a tag, and took a closer look:

I'm talking about in relations to the idea of "SubSpace" not to a particular Sci-Fi universe.

This looks like a problem to me.

Star Trek uses subspace as an alternate part of the time/space continuum, distinct from normal space.  The warp drive manipulates it for FTL in that universe.
Stargate has subspace, but it's only used for communication and wormhole connections (as far as I recall).  Their FTL involves hyperspace.
@TangoOversway added this in chat:  It reminds me of the Lost in Space movie where Prof. Robinson says, "Subspace is a layer of space above regular space." Above? Not under? And how can you have an above and under anyway?

Then there's issues where, instead of subspace, we have the Slipstream (which is kind of like subspace, in that it's an alternate level of reality) and Starburst (which goes through an alternate dimension and could be considered subspace-like).  Oh, and Babylon 5's "hyperspace" works much more like Star Trek's "subspace" (except ships can also traverse it) than it is like Stargate's "hyperspace".
(Sorry; /mini-rant)
So yeah; there's a lot of ambiguous overlap and disconnections between universes...
On the other hand.
This is an old question, it has lots of upvotes, hasn't been closed, and has an accepted answer.  So there doesn't really seem to be much of a reason to close it from that side.  The only reason to close it now, that I can think of, is that new users may see it and think this type of question is common - when in reality, it's still open largely due to the age of the question.
So...  thoughts?  Update the question to be more about Star Trek, close it, leave it?

A:

The asker was adamant that the question was about “the idea of "SubSpace" not to a particular Sci-Fi universe”. Yet “subspace” is not a well-defined concept, it's just a word that several writers have used to mean different things. It isn't fundamentally different from “hyperspace” or other formulations. So we have a choice:

Make the question about Star Trek after all, matching the accepted answer, but not the asker's will.
Make the question generic, matching all three non-accepted answers, but going against the asker's will, and remaining with a question that begs to be unasked (which two of the answers do well).

I think the question can remain — but it needs to be clear that it's asking about Star Trek.

A:

I think the question should be closed as not a real question.  It's basically a list question in disguise; unless you talk about one specific universe you'll get the theory of subspace/hyperspace for every sf universe as an answer, and they'll all be right assuming the answers are properly sourced.

