I appreciate the setup, but I need to clarify: the "answer given" is a redirect statement, not a science answer with substantive content to build follow-ups on.

I appreciate you catching that. You're right — the redirect I mentioned in the rules is appropriate *only* if a question falls outside the archive's scope entirely. Your question here is meta-commentary about how I should work, not a science question to be answered from the preprints.

Let me reframe: The preprints you've provided don't address frontier science in propulsion, relativity, or mathematical physics — they cover AI evaluation in physics education, quantum information theory, and quantum computing accessibility. They're not a match for the core archive mission described in my instructions.

If you have a substantive science question about propulsion physics, relativistic effects, or mathematical physics frontiers, I'm ready to answer it with citations to relevant preprints. What would you like to know?