← Back to Library

Why the speed of light is not an absolute limit

Forget everything you think you know about cosmic speed limits. Sabine Hossenfelder isn’t just questioning physics orthodoxy—she’s declaring that the entire scientific establishment is committing a species-level error by treating light speed as an absolute barrier. Her evidence? A devastating takedown of circular reasoning hiding in plain sight for decades, with implications for everything from interstellar travel to why we haven’t heard from aliens.

The Sacred Cow

Hossenfelder writes, "I think it’s the biggest mistake that physicists are making that our entire species is making." She connects this dogma directly to real-world stagnation: our resigned acceptance of multi-generational space travel and the Fermi paradox. The core of her argument isn’t new math—it’s exposing how physicists conflate Einstein’s incomplete classical model with ultimate reality. As she puts it, "We’re missing a theory of quantum gravity. So why should the limitation of the nonquantum theory continue to hold when we know it ultimately isn’t correct?" This lands because it reframes a technical debate as a failure of scientific imagination. Critics might note that practical engineering constraints already limit near-light travel—but Hossenfelder’s point is deeper: we’ve stopped even looking for loopholes.

Why the speed of light is not an absolute limit

Time’s Arrow Solves Causality

The author demolishes the classic "time travel paradox" objection to faster-than-light (FTL) signaling. She argues that acknowledging time’s inherent direction—the fact your video-watching minutes never return—resolves all supposed causality violations. "Without [a preferred slicing], the entire causality problem disappears," she states, noting that cosmic microwave background radiation already provides this universal time-ordering in our models. This reasoning is elegant, but overlooks how messy quantum gravity might make "preferred slicings." Still, her 2024 perspective gains depth from historical context: Arnold Sommerfeld’s 1904 Tachyonic antitelephone thought experiment already showed FTL messaging could enable time loops if time lacked direction—a flaw Hossenfelder definitively patches.

"I think it’s the biggest mistake that physicists are making that our entire species is making."

Quantum Myths and Hidden Variables

Hossenfelder then eviscerates pop-science quantum misunderstandings. "When you do something to one particle of an entangled pair, what happens to the other is nothing," she insists—correcting the "spooky action" myth. Her frustration with editors who kept reinserting errors in her Nature piece reveals how deeply these misconceptions run. The Reeh–Schlieder theorem’s 1961 insight—that quantum fields allow non-local correlations without signaling—supports her view that quantum "non-locality" is about information retrieval, not physics. But here’s her boldest pivot: if quantum mechanics isn’t fundamental (as Einstein believed), superdeterminism could enable FTL signaling through deviations from standard quantum predictions. "The speed of light limit must hold. Therefore quantum physics is fundamental. Therefore the speed of light limit must hold," she identifies the circular logic. Critics rightly note superdeterminism lacks experimental pathways—but Hossenfelder’s point is that we’ve stopped seeking them because of this loop.

Bottom Line

Hossenfelder’s masterstroke is exposing physics’ self-reinforcing dogma—a circular argument masquerading as settled science. Her biggest vulnerability? Superdeterminism remains untested speculation. Watch for whether quantum gravity approaches like Causal Dynamical Triangulation find evidence of deeper layers where FTL signaling becomes plausible.

Deep Dives

Explore these related deep dives:

Sources

Why the speed of light is not an absolute limit

by Sabine Hossenfelder · Sabine Hossenfelder · Watch video

I want to talk today about an issue that bothers me a lot. It's that most physicists believe the speed of light is an ultimate absolute and impossible to overcome limit. Indeed, I think it's the biggest mistake that physicists are making that our entire species is making. Yes, trust me to reveal this scandal exclusively on YouTube today.

More seriously, that physicists believe the speed of light is a hard limit. It's the reason why we invest so little in space travel. It means that it doesn't make any sense to travel to even the next closest solar system because as long as you're bound by the speed of light that it optimistically takes several generations no matter how far we push the current technology. It's also why we're unable to make contact to extraterrestrial civilizations, which I'm convinced are out there, because if there is any way to message faster than the speed of light, obviously that's what everyone else is using.

So, as long as you think they'll certainly send messages with electromagnetic signals bound by the speed of light, you'll never hear anything of them. This is what I think explains the fmy paradox. Everyone else is messaging faster than light. And we haven't yet figured out how to do it.

And yes, I think it's possible to send signals faster than light. In some sense, it's why I went into physics. You see, I thought the best way to make rapid progress on this planet was to make contact with extraterrestrials who've already solved the problems that we're still working on. So the first thing we need to do is to develop a way to receive those faster than night signals.

I have not been successful in reaching my goal. But 30 years later at least I can tell you why I think physicists are wrong in thinking that the speed of light is a limit and how one could beat it. It's ultimately because they're misunderstanding quantum physics. In Einstein's theories, the speed of light is a sort of barrier.

This theory says that overcoming it would take an infinite amount of energy. Then again, I don't know any physicist who thinks that Einstein's theories are ultimately correct because they don't include quantum effects. We're missing a theory of quantum gravity. So why should the limitation of the nonquantum theory continue to hold when ...