You called?

(3) The majority of science-fiction writers have always ignored causality problems. The few who know the science do so too. So in SF, books, or media, FTL rarely considers causality. In that sense the trouble with the trouble with FTL is that there's no trouble at all.

Hi Joe, I read your "Trouble with FTL" article. I have three comments. They may be trite, but you can decide. (1) FTL breaks the universe. The universe can survive FTL if it exists. What breaks is our human understanding of the universe with FTL. (2) Internally consistent frameworks for FTL are tricky at best. Fixed wormholes usually end up being time machines. Otherwise the concept is sound.

Sorry, Joe, I started this message and got distracted. Only just returned to the keyboard. This issue with FTL and causality violation is one I've worried over too. With my scientist hat on it's a proble, However, with my Sf writer hat on, I do what every other Sf writer does -- I ignore causal problems.

That's weird! Parts of my message are repeating themselves. I must be trapped in a time loop! I knew this would eventually happen. Now I need a groundhog to get out of here.

Hah! No repeating this time. The loop must be broken. I should have known. You can never get a good time loop when you want one.

Hah! Are you moving at relativistic speeds next to a wormhole, perchance?

1: yes, but if you want to get all philosophical about it our understanding of the universe is the universe. I'll probably edit that to make it more explicit that it's a 'choose two of the three' thing.

If I was, I'm more likely to run into a black hole not a wormhole. Navigating my fingers is getting tricky as the hour is late here.

2: I meant internally consistent in the narrative sense: ie don't change the rules as hoc. I'll definately edit that to make it explicit.

3: that's the whole point of the article: yes, this is a problem in reality, but no, it's not a problem for you. I think I said that at the very start of the article, no?

Yes that point is philosophical, but even professional scientists trip over it too. But sometimes we mistake our 'understanding" of the cosmos with the actual universe. Narrative consistency is an excellent way to go in SF.

Yep. Paragraph three to be precise.

Thanks for the comments though!! I really want this to be a sound little piece, since it comes up whenever anyone mentions anything about FTL on worldbuilding.

I said I thought my comments were trite. But FTL keeps coming up on WB and usually it just gets shot down as impossible. It's good to see someone tackle the issue. So I decided even a few small bits of feedback might help.

I'll leave it with you, Joe, as it's time to hit the sack. Keep up the good work.

cheers! All three comments are useful, and it's nice to get any feedback at all!! Sleep well.

Edits in place. Thanks for the feedback!