The issue here is a question of answerability.
It is true that there may be some canonical source that can answer a question, there may even be an exact explanation in some third-party or even straight canon source that fully explains how these things come about.
In some questions though, that is not true. And while speculation can be fun, that is not what SE is about (try the chat for that, or a forum).
Sci-Fi in general draws a lot of fans that are curious about the 'why' and 'how' of things in their favorite shows. We're deeply interested in them too, but unfortunately a question that is asking for information not present in the canon is something we cannot answer.
Some questions ask for an explanation of what goes on at the physical level in Science-Fiction, and while that may be incredibly interesting if written into a good question, it is not something we are prepared to answer. This is Sci-Fi, and sometimes authors don't write an explanation of the full science-based details of a phenomena. We could only speculate, and that is frowned upon in SE as a whole (though not forbidden if it is a good subjective question, but those are rare and more based on intent and decision rather than physical phenomena).
In short, while your questions may be interesting, they may also be too broad, may focus on science-fact over science-fiction, and may not be following the standards of an SE question.
You might get better answers, incidentally, if you post a few links to the questions you're asking about specifically. I'm only speculating at this point because I have no frame of reference, but by how you've described it, those are the most likely reasons you're seeing downvotes/closures.
Edit: For further reading, real questions have answers.