> Why would FTL automatically invert causality? And yet it does, that is just the mathematics of it. Another commenter linked this worked example: https://en.m

> Why would FTL automatically invert causality? And yet it does, that is just the mathematics of it. Another commenter linked this worked example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyonic_antitelephone https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachyonic_antitelephone > well tested assumptions, but still assumptions, that could be proven false one day But not in the way that you seem to be implying. They may be proven _incomplete_, but existing measurements confirm that these assumptions are mostly correct (to high degree of accuracy, and over a lot of measurements), and so won't be superseded by something completely different that contradicts those measurements. The best essay on this subject is "The Relativity of Wrong", Asimov, 1989 https://chem.tufts.edu/answersinscience/relativityofwrong.htm https://chem.tufts.edu/answersinscience/relativityofwrong.ht...