What might happen were the speed of light to be exceeded is a subject of hot debate in the philosophy of modern physics. Therefore, this is of interest to philosophy.
The most straight-forward way I know for expressing relative motion is the Lorentz equation, and I assert the most straight-forward answer would be to attempt to extend its results past the speed of light. Therefore, I am referencing the Lorentz equation for this question.
My studies of interest in regards to this are the following articles by physicists:
The implication of Cox-Hill's proposal is that there are two possible simple extensions to the Lorentz formulation. Although I do not understand the details yet, that idea seems intuitive in a very notional way, since the Lorentz equation normally gives complex values (which we represent as two parts) past the speed of light. Cox-Hill mention, if I understand them right, that their extension possibilities might both be true in a sense, and represent a bifurcation of relativity theory into two equally likely possibilities. I am not quite clear on what observable facts actually bifurcate once the notion of spacetime is extended in this way; it may be clearer to Cox-Hill, however.
My question regards precedent: Has anything been written, probably in metaphysics or philosophy of space and time, regarding the possibility of choice at/near/past the speed of light or at pure energy (as observed relatively)?
(Please do not reference science fiction, unless it has a reference in academic philosophy. If you propose your own idea, please try to keep it brief and give as many good references as you can.)