>>10894210This anon sees it too. I call bullshit on all above arguing, because it is not clear what people are refering to by "causality" in this thread. There seems to be two main groups.
Group A seems to be equation-centered, and claims that "causality" prevents anything, especially non-zero matter, from exceeding c. It seems that the act of visual observation (light cones) are the standard for recording and measuring time and distance traversed by c and FTL traveling objects. In this group, this standard of c-centric measurement accounts for post-action events affecting pre-action, creating a paradox. The key point is that it is a given assumption that mass and information CANNOT exceed c.
Group B asserts the claim for "causality" that FTL creates superluminal effects, of which I understand to mean the visual observation of events transpire in a non-linear temporal manner in difference reference frames, but that all events occur in proper sequence, and that these observations are very understandably and illusion. In this scenario, photons are limited to c, but non-zero masses are not. They leave the beautiful equations of time dilation at the door when it comes to non-zero mass; perhaps they believe the consequences of those equations do not describe true time dilation, but time dilation perceived by observers of photons.
I'm with group B in terms of understanding. I have a monkey engineering degree with mediocre math at best, but I can classically create the scenario of FTL and analyze how different frames of reference would perceive these events visually. It creates strange cases of how events APPEAR to trsnspire, but I am not aware or convinced yet of why mass should be c-limited, and I certainly disagree that group B's definition of causality is violated as events transpire factually in order regardless of other frames observations.
I implore group A to explain from the perspective of group B why their understanding of "causality" is flawed.
