> Personally my biggest question would be why didn't we observe anything FTL in the Universe yet.
If something was FTL, and we need light to see things, how could anything FTL be seen, as light could not move fast enough to reach it then reach our eyes. Further, assuming we could travel FTL, while traveling we'd be nearly blind, and anything we did see wouldn't make any sense.
I don't know much about physics, but cameras take pictures of things faster than their shutter speed all the time. What occurs is blurring and bright spots.
Just because something is moving faster than the speed of light doesn't mean the light reflected from it never reaches our eyes.
I think another way to perceive it is as if you have a buffer that is beginning to overflow because you can't empty it faster than the speed of light. That overflow is how I'd imagine you'd detect FTL objects. It's like the visual equivalent of a sonic boom. Again idk what I'm talking about, but it was nice to think about :)
I just saw a fun YouTube video on this: https://youtu.be/vFNgd3pitAI (at 13m). I don't know how sound their reasons are, but it seems pretty well put together.
Basically you'd see the same thing from multiple locations, as the light emitted closest to you will hit you at the same time light emitted in the past from further away reaches you. It would construct as two objects going in opposite directions.
Imagine a triangle from points A B C. If I'm at C, and I know distance between A and B, then if something is at A then at B and I measure time between these events in my frame of reference..
If something was FTL, and we need light to see things, how could anything FTL be seen, as light could not move fast enough to reach it then reach our eyes. Further, assuming we could travel FTL, while traveling we'd be nearly blind, and anything we did see wouldn't make any sense.