Yes, there are loopholes in the physics that might allow faster than light (FTL) travel, but nobody really knows. The speed of light as a limit is not a consequence of relativity, it's a postulate that limits how the theory could be developed. The theory doesn't actually forbid FTL, it just works out the consequences of assuming that it IS forbidden.
It certainly seems to be true on the basis of current knowledge that the speed of light is constant for all observers and is the cosmic speed limit, but there are known quantum effects that seem to require instantaneous transfers of information. Despite their great successes, quantum mechanics and general relativity remain fundamentally inconsistent, they can't both be right. Physicists wouldn't put it that way, they'd say they're incomplete, but it amounts to the same thing. There's at least one more layer of reality science hasn't penetrated yet.
Personally, I incline to the view, on the basis of no evidence whatsoever, I just find it emotionally satisfying, that there are many more layers, reality is fractal in the sense that it'll show the same level of complexity no matter at what scale we examine it.
Seems to be a lot of money to throw a rock into a 'pond'.
Just how much fuel is going to be used to have go around and around 24 times (how close is the 1st loop) rather than fall as fast as gravity can pull oy and not one loop is completed. All 24 should be closer than mercury.
These records will fall again and again over the course of the Parker Solar Probe's $1.5 billion mission, which began Aug. 12 with a liftoff from Florida's Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. The spacecraft will study the sun during 24 close flybys over the next seven years, getting closer and closer to our star with each encounter.
The Parker Solar Probe's final flyby, in 2025, will bring the craft within a mere 3.83 million miles (6.16 million km) of the sun's surface. And the sun's powerful gravity will eventually accelerate the probe to a top speed of around 430,000 mph (690,000 km/h), NASA officials have said.
How much does it weigh 4M miles away from the surface of the sun?? I assume the breaking rocket is a tad bigger than the ones left on the moon.
Why not land it on Mercury and it can send back data for years like the Mars Rovers are, . . . . cough.
Being the stickler for details that I am all it takes is a headline like this to have some 'questions' that don't seem to have been asked or addressed properly.
1 How can they spot planets around different starts (not the closest one either) when we have problems seeing fine details of the moon.
2 Using our solar system mode how much do the planets move the sun out of it's preferred course? IMO little to none as the planets are randomly spinning around the sun at different speeds so all the weight is never on one side long enough to created an imbalance let alone one big enough to be measured. If you were on the moon could you see a 1ft difference in the tides over a short period time and then determine the moon is changing it's position and that is the cause of the higher tides.
3 So far NASA can be shown to receive huge sums of money to do great scientific things and what the public gets in return are nothing but artistic animation of what somebody has dreamed up as to how the universe works Seems a bit suspect that we can spot other planets but we have no papers on how any of the megaliths were built or even how our climate changes over time.
4 How can any lies make it past the ones in charge? Since they can't then the only conclusions left is that they are the one in control of 'bad science' and since that is not independent you can be assured they are doing the same thing with everything the can control. Guess who the targeted victim is?
There are a lot more but I doubt these one can even be taken seriously by the trad that inhabit this board. The reason there is no dust on any rock in the Apollo missions is dude will get blown off a rock that is exposed to air that is moving.