Why Going Faster-Than-Light Leads to Time Paradoxes

Decoding Life's Mysteries
11 followers
25 Video Views·Jun 5, 2025
Is faster-than-light (FTL) travel possible? In most discussions of this, we get hung up on the physics of particular ideas, such as wormholes or warp drives. But today, we take a more zoomed out approach that addresses all FTL propulsion - as well as FTL messaging. Because it turns out that they all allow for time travel. Join us today as we explore why this is so and the profound consequences that ensue.
Our galaxy is over a hundred thousand light years across, a distance so vast that it defies
ordinary understanding. Even humanity's earliest radio transmissions hurtling through space at the
speed of light would still only have washed over less than one millionth of the stellar population.
The cosmic speed limit, the speed of light, is so diminutive compared to our galaxy that
any aspirations we might harbour for galactic exploration or even just communication seem
impossible, at least within human lifetimes. But humanity has long wondered, could there be
a cheat code? Could there be a way to exceed that cosmic speed limit? Could we go faster than light?
There is no other technology that I so keenly wish could be realised than FTL. Since childhood,
I've looked up at the stars and dreamt of one day reaching them, of exploring the ocean of space,
the zoo of worlds, the menagerie of life. It almost seems like a cruel cosmic joke that the
universe be arranged in such a way that we are able to look out and glimpse its wonders and yet
are trapped here by the speed of light, fated to only ever peer through the bars of our cosmic
prison and dream. And so it's no surprise that human ingenuity and aspiration has raged against
Einstein's cosmic speed limit. After all, we've never been so good at doing what we're told.
To be clear though, we currently have no way of building or even conceiving of a practical FTL
system, be it for travel or just for communication. But there are threads that physicists pull out
that it is hoped one day might bear fruit. For example, we know that Einstein's speed limit
only truly applies to travel through space, but that space itself has no such constraint.
For this reason, there are parts of the universe receding away from us faster than the speed of
light, as the fabric of the cosmos itself expands in all directions. Could we one day learn to
manipulate space then and somehow use this to travel faster than light?
The hypothetical Alkubierre drive is perhaps the most famous example of this concept. Inspired by
Star Trek's warp drive, Miguel Alkubierre showed that there exists a solution within Einstein's
relativistic field equations that, in principle, could allow FTL. By expanding space behind itself
and contracting it ahead, a bubble of space could cruise between the stars at arbitrarily fast
speeds. The idea has certainly faced many challenges though, such as requiring the use of
exotic matter, enormous energy requirements, and even obliterating the destination through the
buildup of radiation gathered up by the bubble. Yet optimists might argue that none of these are
truly showstoppers, merely engineering challenges. A more pressing problem is folding in quantum
effects into the Alkubierre drive. In 2009, Farnese et al. showed that the warp drive bubble leads to
exponentially increasing Hawking radiation on the inside of it. This isn't just a hazard to the crew,
the exponential buildup destabilizes the bubble itself. It's important to remember that we don't
have a good theory of quantum gravity yet, and the Alkubierre drive is conceived in its absence,
just using general relativity alone. These kinds of quantum concerns don't just plague
warp drives. Wormholes, another hypothetical FTL system, has also been criticized as being
possibly unstable due to these quantum effects ignored by general relativity. Ultimately,
we can't truly prove whether wormholes or Alkubierre drives are allowed or not until
we have solved quantum gravity or built a working example of one. The other problem with assessing
the feasibility of FTL is that there are multiple ideas out there, such as tachyons, Krasnikov tubes,
quantum tunneling, and entanglement. And each one of those has a diverse number of flavours proposed.
For example, the Alkubierre metric has been tweaked many times to reduce the energy requirements in
various ways. And of course, physicists still surely will continue to conjure up new varieties
in the future. As a result, it seems somewhat hopeless that we'll ever be able to completely
exclude FTL as a possibility. On the one hand, our hearts might rejoice in that because it means that
hope persists and the dream will always be alive. But on the other hand, our minds complain because
after all, this is science, and we want definitive, clear, objective answers, not
eternal maybes that will forever be unfalsifiable. So is there anything that we can definitively say
with existing knowledge? Well, it turns out, yes. Despite the fact that we don't have a theory of
quantum gravity, despite the fact that there are countless variants and ideas about FTL systems,
there is a definitive statement that we can make about all FTL systems. They all allow for
causality breaking time travel. When you hear that FTL implies time travel, you might think
about sci-fi portrayals of accelerating past the speed of light. But actually, the causality
breaking is far more subtle and occurs even with FTL messaging systems alone. The explanation
is a little challenging, so we're going to break it down into small, bite-sized steps and use
diagrams to help us understand it. It's worth spending a little bit of time on this because
the consequences are truly profound. Let's start by drawing a line representing one dimension of
space along the bottom of the screen, and a line representing time that's orthogonal to that.
We now have a spacetime or Minkowski diagram. To get acquainted with this setup, let's consider
a distant star, like Vega. This green square represents Vega at a certain point in space,
in other words, its location, but also at a certain point in time. Let's consider that
Vega is stationary in this frame of reference, so that as we move through time, it traces out
this line. Note how it has the same position at all times. This line is what we would call
the world line for Vega. And we don't have to limit ourselves to just Vega, we can, for example,
put the Earth on the spacetime diagram as well. Earth isn't moving much compared to Vega, so
let's just assume it's also stationary in this frame and thus has a parallel world line.
Since we're ultimately interested in speed when it comes to FTL, let's now familiarise ourselves
with what speed looks like on this diagram. Because we're working in the Earth's rest frame
here, we don't feel ourselves moving, and thus in this frame, we simply move parallel to the time
axis. So, such world lines correspond to no travel through space. In contrast, instantaneous travel,
which is the most extreme FTL possible, would go from the Earth to Vega with no time passing at
all. Thus, it would appear as this pink line parallel to the space axis. Between those two
extremes, we have travelling at the speed of light, given by this yellow line. In a Minkowski diagram
like this, light always travels at 45 degree angles just like this, and technically is called
Removing Vega for the moment, we first note that we are of course free to travel both
forwards and backwards through space. However, if the speed of light is the cosmic speed limit, then
any path below the null lines, highlighted here, are impossible to achieve. These would require
FTL systems. On the other hand, lines above the null are perfectly accessible, such as this
stationary world line that the Earth occupies. A slower than light, or STL ship, would travel at
some angle between that of a null and a stationary world line. Okay, congratulations, you've mastered
the basics of space-time diagrams, but now let's go a little bit deeper and note some relationships
and rules that we'll need later. Stripping down this diagram, consider the Earth sat in space as
and again, working in the Earth's rest frame. From Earth's perspective, we don't feel like we're
moving, that's relativity for you. So, as time progresses, our location in space is always the
same, forming this world line. Crucially, that's the same as the time axis. In other words, the
world line defines the time axis as perceived by those following it. This is important, because
we all know how relativity screws around with time, but here, there's a clear definition of
where the perceived time axis lives. Now, adding the null line back on, we can note the relationship
that the space axis is really just a flip of the time axis around the null. So again, this provides
a useful rule for orienting ourselves later when we'll have to deal with more complicated scenarios.
Okay, so we're finally ready to start imagining FDL systems on here. Let's put Vega back on the
diagram as a distant destination. Consider that at some distant location from Vega, but one closer
to the Earth, a supernova goes off. We'll call it supernova X. The radiation from the supernova
travels at the speed of light and thus follows a null line. Following this path, we can see that
Earth sees X first, and then Vega, marked by these stars. Now imagine that Earth has an FDL
messaging system. As soon as Earth sees X, we decide to send a warning to Vega. Recall that
FDL lines fall below the null just like this, so we can see that Vega would learn of X before
it actually sees it. Mission accomplished. Now, remember I said earlier that the whole
problem with FDL systems comes down to causality, so let's look at the order of events here to see
if everything makes sense. For this, we need to work through time from the past to the future
and track this sequence that occurs. We can do this by taking a slice through time, a simultaneous
moment, and slide it up the screen from bottom to top, noting the sequence of events we see.
And remember, I'm in Earth's reference frame here, so the time slices here are time as perceived by
Earthlings, although this is also equivalent for Vegans too. So, sliding up the page, we can see
that the first event is that supernova X occurs. Sliding further up, we can see that the next event
is that Earth sees X and warns Vega. Going further, third, we see that Vega receives the warning,
and once more, finally, we see that Vega sees X. Looking at the order, this seems sensible. Cause
precedes effect. For example, supernova X happens and then Earth sees X. Similarly, Earth warns
Vega, then Vega receives the warning. Okay, so if you stopped the video here and walked away,
please don't, you would erroneously conclude that FTL travel is fine. It doesn't break causality.
Cause precedes effect. There's nothing to worry about. Well, that's because in order to unveil
the causality-breaking power of FTL, we have to add another ingredient into the mix. We have to
add a slower-than-light STL relativistic ship here, because doing so leads to some
disturbing consequences. Okay, so coming back to our diagram, we currently have no STL ships on
here. Just Earth, Vega, X, and the FTL message is shown in pink. STL ships have to follow world
lines above the null, as shown here in red. Now, remember our rules from before. The world line
defines the time axis as perceived by those following it. So, the time axis as perceived by
the crew of that ship actually lives along that red line. It's not the same as the Earth's time
axis in white. The distortion of time is one of those mind-bending consequences of special
relativity, which our Journey to the End of the Universe video explores in much more depth.
Now, remember rule number two, that the space axis flips the time axis about the null line.
So, as perceived by the crew, their space axis actually lives here. This is a remarkable
consequence of Einstein's rule that the speed of light is the same for all observers. Time
and space bend to accommodate its constancy in all frames of reference.
Recall before that we tracked this sequence of events with sliding time slices, lines of
simultaneous moments. And recall that these slices must be parallel to the space axis.
So, if we want to draw these time slices from the crew's perspective, they must be parallel
to the red dashed line, sliding from the bottom right of the screen to the top left.
So, coming back to the order of events, look, we already know what the Earthlings and the
ship think. Using our sliding time slice, we can see that the first event in time,
as perceived by the ship's crew, is that Vega receives the warning message from Earth about
X. Going further, the second event is that supernova X happens. Third, we see that Earth
sees X. And fourth and final, the Vegans see X. Looking at this order, we can immediately see
something very strange. Vega received the warning message about X before Earth even sent it. How
is that possible? Cause transpired after the effect. Causality is broken.
At this point, you might wonder, maybe the problem isn't so much with FTL, but rather
with the theory of relativity itself. What happens if we take away those FTL messages?
Because if causality violation persists, even without FTL, then we would know that it's not FTL
that's the problem, it's relativity. So, let's repeat the experiment, but now I've removed that
FTL message. Sliding our time slice along, we see that the first event is now supernova X.
Next, the second event is that Earth sees X. And finally, the third event is that Vega sees X.
So, the sequence makes perfect sense now. No causality violation. Indeed, we get the same
order as that which the Earthlings and Vegans would report. So, the causality violation of before
isn't a problem with relativity, it's a problem of FTL itself. Now, you might say,
so what? Does this disagreement about the order of events truly matter? Isn't this just an
academic question, one with no real world consequences? Well, I'm afraid not. Causality
violation here is profound, and it could actually allow the crew to potentially break the universe.
To see this, let's modify the scenario so that the crew are no longer mere observers, but can
actually intervene. Let's modify the FTL world line just a little. Instead of being sent to Vega,
it is intercepted by the crew of the STL ship. So, they would receive the message here. After
receiving the message, they decide to send a reply back to Earth, using an FTL transmitter that they
have on board their ship. For a bit of perverse fun, let's imagine that they send a message back
to Earth saying, turn off FTL transmitter. Okay, but where does this reply live on this space-time
diagram? Bizarrely, it would follow a world line like this. Remember that our entire diagram is
cast in Earth's frame of reference, and in this frame, the reply message seems to be travelling
backwards through time. And now, we see the problem. The reply is received back on Earth
before the message was ever sent. So, Earth receives a message saying, turn off their
transmitter. And so, they don't then send a message out subsequently. But, if they never
send out that message, then the ship will never receive it, and thus it will never reply. And thus,
Earth should not turn off its transmitters, etc, etc. Like killing our grandfather before we were
born, we have set up now a grandfather paradox. Now, you might be wondering, perhaps there's
something wrong with the lines that I drew here. The diagram is, after all, getting pretty
complicated at this point. To simplify things and really nail this home, let's imagine that our FTL
messages are not just faster than light, but they're instantaneous. Modifying this means that
the original Earth message must be parallel to the space axis, because no time transpires. And
similarly, the reply must now be parallel to the SDL ship's space axis, the red dashed line.
And we can see that this simplified picture leads to exactly the same result, albeit one that's even
more extreme. So, the causality violation isn't some mere academic issue here. It opens the door
to time travel paradoxes. And remember that we didn't assume any particular FTL system here.
This applies to them all. Whenever you have an FTL system, you also have a time travel machine.
A machine capable of creating paradoxes in time. In one of my personal favourites, we tackled
time travel in a previous video, along with the paradoxes that it elicits. Physicists despise
problems like the grandfather paradox, because they undermine the logical underpinnings of our
universe, and no good solution exists to resolve them. It was the late Stephen Hawking who posed
the most accepted way out. Put simply, time paradoxes are not possible. Hawking's famous
chronology protection conjecture suggests that the laws of nature are arranged in such a way
that time paradoxes simply cannot happen. Whenever you try, some physical effect will prevent you
from achieving that goal. What might this look like for an FTL system then? Such as, for example,
the Algebraic Drive that we discussed earlier. How is it that Hawking is going to somehow
save us here? Well, it turns out that in that case, Hawking himself may have already done so
in his previous work. Because, recall that one of the problems with the Algebraic Drive is that
they generate enormous amounts of radiation inside the bubble. What kind of radiation? Well,
it's Hawking radiation. That radiation, in fact, builds up exponentially and rapidly destabilizes
the bubble. Crucially, Hawking radiation is a quantum effect, and recall that a unified theory
of quantum mechanics and gravity so far eludes us. So even though we don't truly understand how
quantum effects and gravity play together, Hawking's chronology protection conjecture
essentially argues that it's in that missing knowledge that the answer lies, that one day
we will discover a unified theory that neatly explains why time travel paradoxes can never
happen, and thus why FTL systems too are not allowed. I promised you something definitive
about FTL, and now we have it. Unfettered use of FTL systems can break causality and cause
paradoxes. Hawking predicts that such violations are impossible, and so by that logic does that
mean that FTL is in turn impossible? Not quite. One way that we might be able to salvage FTL
and satisfy Hawking is to consider that, hey, FTL is possible, it's just that there are strict
rules about its use. After all, when we removed the STL ship from our space-time diagram,
there were no violations of causality. Or even more subtly, just demanding that the ship never
intervenes leads to no paradoxes. Perhaps FTL systems are possible, but somehow specific
paradox-causing activities like replying to that original FTL message are forbidden. This
sounds a little contrived, but it provides at least a possible way out for FTL. The other option
is just to reject Hawking's conjecture outright, to suppose that paradoxes are allowed and deal
with the enormously challenging consequences of making sense of the universe with their inclusion.
As hard as a pill is to swallow, we have to accept that FTL systems have fundamental problems here
that go beyond engineering or energetics. But remember, exploration of the galaxy is not
impossible without FTL, it just takes a lot longer. It would mean that our efforts to explore space
are not about personal gain or egotistical pleasure, but rather are performed in service
of the next generation and those beyond that. That as individuals we would act selflessly and
as a species in unified common goal. Perhaps then, in the end, no FTL is a blessing in disguise,
because it might compel us to work together for the future, for something bigger than ourselves.
So, until next time, stay thoughtful and stay curious.
Thank you so much for watching, everybody. If you like our stuff, be sure to do all the YouTube stuff,
like, share, subscribe, comment. And if you really want to help us out, you can click the link up above
where you can become a donor to my research team at Columbia University.
Just like our latest two donors, I want to thank Dhruv Bansal and Jonathan Sturm.
Thank you so much for your support. So thanks again, everybody, and have a cosmically awesome day out there.
