is not what physicists believe. The actual statement is that under a wide variety of conditions the Core Theory is a very accurate description of the universe. And it precludes possibilities like FTL and time travel, among others. By the way, the FTL proposals you mentioned are not really FTL. For example the Alcubierre drive, contrary to popular views, does not enable one to travel arbitrarily far faster than light, only as far as the light propagates before the drive is “engaged” An eternal Alcubierre drive is another story, but it’s not something you can control, it just is. Same thing with Krasnikov’s tubes. All these, as well as traversable wormholes require negative energy sources and lead to various paradoxes. Additionally, there are theorems in general relativity that state that under a variety of conditions changing the topology of space is impossible without having singularities and/or closed timelike curves (the latter cannot be created, they are eternal).
Some hope of further breakthroughs is at the interface of general relativity and quantum field theory, since we know they do not play well together, even in the low-energy limit, hence the black hole information paradox.
The hope that such a breakthrough might lead to effectively FTL travel is quite dashed by the lack of astrophysical observations that would hint at anything happening superluminally, even though the energies that are achieved in many observed natural phenomena are very much higher than anything we can hope to reach in lab experiments. The main astrophysical unknowns, dark energy and dark matter, are not in any way superluminal.
So, for anything like what you hope for (and we all hope for) would have to go beyond the core theory, and even further beyond the observed but yet unexplained macroscopic phenomena, which is a really tall order.
The hope that such a breakthrough might lead to effectively FTL travel is quite dashed by the lack of astrophysical observations that would hint at anything happening superluminally, even though the energies that are achieved in many observed natural phenomena are very much higher than anything we can hope to reach in lab experiments.
Actually, not that much higher. The Oh-My-God particle had a center-of-mass collision energy of 750 TeV, roughly 60 times that of LHC. I seriously doubt it’s a good idea to probe into energy ranges outside of naturally occurring events considering the potential benefits and existential risks.
is not what physicists believe. The actual statement is that under a wide variety of conditions the Core Theory is a very accurate description of the universe. And it precludes possibilities like FTL and time travel, among others. By the way, the FTL proposals you mentioned are not really FTL. For example the Alcubierre drive, contrary to popular views, does not enable one to travel arbitrarily far faster than light, only as far as the light propagates before the drive is “engaged” An eternal Alcubierre drive is another story, but it’s not something you can control, it just is. Same thing with Krasnikov’s tubes. All these, as well as traversable wormholes require negative energy sources and lead to various paradoxes. Additionally, there are theorems in general relativity that state that under a variety of conditions changing the topology of space is impossible without having singularities and/or closed timelike curves (the latter cannot be created, they are eternal).
Some hope of further breakthroughs is at the interface of general relativity and quantum field theory, since we know they do not play well together, even in the low-energy limit, hence the black hole information paradox.
The hope that such a breakthrough might lead to effectively FTL travel is quite dashed by the lack of astrophysical observations that would hint at anything happening superluminally, even though the energies that are achieved in many observed natural phenomena are very much higher than anything we can hope to reach in lab experiments. The main astrophysical unknowns, dark energy and dark matter, are not in any way superluminal.
So, for anything like what you hope for (and we all hope for) would have to go beyond the core theory, and even further beyond the observed but yet unexplained macroscopic phenomena, which is a really tall order.
Actually, not that much higher. The Oh-My-God particle had a center-of-mass collision energy of 750 TeV, roughly 60 times that of LHC. I seriously doubt it’s a good idea to probe into energy ranges outside of naturally occurring events considering the potential benefits and existential risks.