Hey all!

Today’s topic will further explore the subjects of fleet movement, FTL-travel and the general wonders one might happen upon when ripping holes through subspace. As the writing of this is a bit sudden the dev diary came out late today, our apologies!
The galaxy is a pretty huge place and to get anywhere in a timely manner you’ll want to travel faster than the speed of light, or use FTL-travel for short. Stellaris will have three methods of FTL that players can use; Warp, Hyperlanes and Wormholes. They all have distinct advantages and disadvantages when it comes to the strategic movement of ships and fleets causing expansion paths, diplomacy and wars to be quite different depending on the method used.

Warp
Warp requires each ship in the fleet to be equipped with a Warp Drive. These are quite costly to build and cause a major drain on each ship’s available power, but allows unconstrained travel to any system within range. When travelling to a system outside the range of a single warp-jump, the fleet has to make a sequence of jumps through a number of systems. Any jump puts a considerable strain on a ship’s Warp Drive, causing the fleet to not be able to jump again for a short while after arrival. While this can be reduced by more advanced technology, it does remain a weak point throughout the game for any species using this method.
Fleets using Warp Drives to travel will need to do so at the edge of a system to lessen the gravitational pull of the local star. This in combination with the fact that warp-jumps have the slowest FTL-speed of the three methods means that the arrival point of an incoming warp-fleet can be identified, and possibly ambushed. The cost of freedom is potentially high!

Wormhole
Some species have decided to sidestep this whole business of blasting through the void at ludicrous speed. They prefer to open up a temporary wormhole that a fleet may use to instantly travel to a distant system. These wormholes can only be generated by a Wormhole Station, a type of space station that can only be constructed on the outer edge of a system. Any fleet wanting to travel will have to use the Wormhole Station as a connecting point, passing through it whenever they leave the system. The station may only generate a single wormhole at a time, forcing all ships and fleets to wait while one is being prepared. The larger the fleet, the longer it takes for the Wormhole Station to be ready. The wormhole generated does allow two-way travel, but will collapse almost instantly after sending a fleet through.
Constructing and maintaining an efficient network of Wormhole Stations is vital to any species using wormholes, as it will allow sending huge fleets from one part of the galaxy to another in very short time. It also allows striking deep inside enemy territory with little warning. This great strength can also be a great weakness, as fleets are left with no means of further offense or retreat should the network be disabled through covert attacks by enemy strike-fleets.

Hyperdrive
The galaxy in Stellaris has a hidden network of hyperlanes connecting the systems, only visible for those who know where to look. Ships that are equipped with a Hyperdrive can access these lanes and use them to traverse the galaxy at incredible speed. They are however bound by the preexisting network, and has to path through each system connecting their current location and target. Galactic voids lacking systems are in effect huge movement-blockers for any species using hyperlanes, having few systems allowing possible crossings. An enemy could potentially fortify these vital systems should they become aware of their existence, creating strategic choke-points. As the hyperlanes exist in subspace, fleets may access them from anywhere within a system and does not have to travel from the gravitational edge as Warp Drives and Wormhole Stations do. As such, catching a fleet using hyperlanes can be tricky. Correctly identifying the paths to intercept and interrupt their somewhat long charge-up is probably your best bet.

All methods of FTL-travel can be improved by researching more advanced technologies. While their exact effects differ some they all improve the speed, range, efficiency or cooldown of FTL-travel. However, being able to casually bend time and space with increased power does not necessarily mean using it with more responsibility. As additional species bend the laws of physics to send larger and larger fleets through the galaxy, there is always the risk of something, or someone, noticing...

Next week we’ll talk more about the different species in the galaxy. Look forward to it!

 

[B3ndolf]

Theoretical physics is a specialisation of engineering physics at my university. You may be able to get there from a philosophical bachelor too but no one ambitious does that.



I haven't heard of any explanaion of a wormhole where it would have a limited range. Then again Ive never seen any theories how a wormhole could be artificially created at all, tbut eh natural occuring one (again none have ever been proven to exist) should be completly random from any point to any point regardless of the relation between these points. And it doesn't seem to be a matter of energy at all, or infinite energy if you will. Wormholes are suggested to be the result of paradoxes (pun not intended) or impossible scenarios, or extreemly reletivistic phenomenon, like objects moving faster than the speed of light (note relativity only prohibits actually reaching the speed of light going faster is not impossible beyond it being impossible to accelerate through the speed of light) or at the event horizon of a blackhole.



No I think you mean "Strawman for global warming the movie", or "Dumbing down a serious issue to cheap entertainment and missunderstanding everything about it." The movie.

for a self proclaimed scientist you have an aweful grasp of the meaning of the word theoretical or theories. you continuously post theories as if they were fact and refute other peoples theories based on your favoured theories. A theory is a made up idea that going by our current knowledge could be right, it is not even remotely a comprehensive or accurate explanation of the phenomenon theorised about, if it was then it wouldnt be a theory any more. since we have no idea how wormholes work or even if they exist or could be created, all we can go off are theories and artficial wormhole tech is so far in advance of our own science that one guys idea of how it should work is pretty much as good as the next. i could theorise that wormholes are created by invisible space moles that tunnel through the fabric of space-time and that has pretty much the same validity as any other theory considering how little we understand the subject.

the general concept of a wormhole in sci-fi is a hole in space which you can travel through to another hole in space somewhere else at close to instantaneous speed, so why you are claiming that wormholes have to follow the theory that those 2 holes are actually the same point baffles me, the holes could be connected by a stable tube through some other dimension or through warp space or subspace or the aether. just because it doesnt follow your favourite theory doesnt disqualify it as wormholes or make it warp drive instead.

as for your complaints about hand waveiness, how ridiculous can you get? of coarse its hand wavy, it has to be since we dont understand the science behind it and are in fact just making stuff up because its entertaining and this is a game. even if we did have a much more solid understanding of the science behind the various methods of ftl travel it would still be hand wavy because ultimately game play and game mechanics trump realism every time and for it to be a balanced and fun game the different types need advantages and disadvantages.

 

[Chief of Staff]

I would also suggest adding one unusually stable wormhole to be randomly placed somewhere in the galaxy far away, perhaps created by a deity or something like in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine that make it all more mysterious and also allows for additional events dealing with wormhole itself and the deity/whatever that created it. There could also be a planet right next to it who worshipped that deity and because of that faith would make them more difficult to subdue by a potential conqueror.

One could build a station near the wormhole in an attempt to control the mouth of that wormhole. It would also allow to control trade and to conduct exploration in the distant quadrant via that wormhole. And of course, one never know what lies beyond this wormhole, perhaps the anti-Federation like the Dominion in DS9 that could threaten even the strongest Federation. This would all add political dynamics and mysterious aspect to this game, furthering the RPG feel of this game.

 

[Jon Severinsson]

for a self proclaimed scientist you have an aweful grasp of the meaning of the word theoretical or theories. you continuously post theories as if they were fact and refute other peoples theories based on your favoured theories. A theory is a made up idea that going by our current knowledge could be right, it is not even remotely a comprehensive or accurate explanation of the phenomenon theorised about

I think you are more confused about it than TheDungen is. "A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation" [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory]. What you are talking about would by a scientist be called conjecture, not theory. Just because laymen often use the term theory differently does not make any such conjecture (aka theory) equal to a theory (aka scientific theory), and refuting conjecture (aka theory) based on a theory (aka scientific theory) is the only responsible thing a scientist can do.

(NB: I'm not a physicist, but I am a scientist and I know the lingo, even if I don't know the particulars about any given physics theory.)

 

[Velorian]

I think you are more confused about it than TheDungen is. "A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation" [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory]. What you are talking about would by a scientist be called conjecture, not theory. Just because laymen often use the term theory differently does not make any such conjecture (aka theory) equal to a theory (aka scientific theory), and refuting conjecture (aka theory) based on a theory (aka scientific theory) is the only responsible thing a scientist can do.

(NB: I'm not a physicist, but I am a scientist and I know the lingo, even if I don't know the particulars about any given physics theory.)

True enough, but some theories are more certain than others. Few question the Theory of Gravity but pretty much any scientific theory could be wrong or proven to have exceptions. Perhaps the future discovers that, while usually true, under specific criteria an otherwise certain phenomena behaves differently.

This is more likely the less we know about a phenomena and frankly our knowledge on wormholes is limited.

 

[Jon Severinsson]

Theoretical physics is a specialisation of engineering physics at my university. You may be able to get there from a philosophical bachelor too but no one ambitious does that.

Whoa, seriously? I have never heard about something like that before. Could you give some link referring to that (preferably in english )?

In most educational systems there are two or more parallel paths at university, and the same subject can often be studied in more than one, and you can sometimes jump between them when you move from one degree to the next up.

For example, in Swedish we are fairly consistently using "teknologie " (technical), "filosofie ", (philosophical), and "medicine " (medical), as a prefix to either "kandidat" (bachelor), "magister" (master) or "doktor" (doctor), while in English bachelor degrees are usually not distinguish between, Master degrees are either " of Science" or " of the Arts", and Doctorate degrees are either " of Philosophy" or " of Medicine" (though the Latin "Philosophiae Doctor" (Ph.D.) and "Medicinae Doctor" (M.D.) are frequently used instead). Other languages use other distinctions, but the important thing to be aware of is that none of these titles does in itself tell you the subject mater of the degree, that is usually tacked on at the end. For example, my university offers both "tek. mag. i Ekonomi" (technical master in Economy, approx. Master of Science in Economy) and "fil. mag. i Ekonomi" (philosophical master in Economy, approx. Master of the Arts in Economy), and there are various computer science, logistics and statistics degrees available in both flavours as well. It also offers both philosophical and medical degrees in psychology (a philosophical master in psychology makes you a psychologist, a medical doctor in psychology makes you a psychiatrist).

What TheDungen is saying is that you can get a Ph.D. in Theoretical Physics from either a Master of Science in [whatever] Physics or a Master of the Arts in [whatever] Physics, not that you can get there from a Master of the Arts in Philosophy...

 

[TheDungen]

True enough, but some theories are more certain than others. Few question the Theory of Gravity but pretty much any scientific theory could be wrong or proven to have exceptions. Perhaps the future discovers that, while usually true, under specific criteria an otherwise certain phenomena behaves differently.

This is more likely the less we know about a phenomena and frankly our knowledge on wormholes is limited.

Non existant actually we've never observed a wormhole, not natural nor atrificial. A wormhole is merely a hypotesis of a phenomenon. My statements were in relation to the definition of the hypothesis, we can't test for something if we don't all agree what we're looking for (or rahter more accuretly as Jon pointed out looking to disprove).

 

[Held der Arbeit]

However, being able to casually bend time and space with increased power does not necessarily mean using it with more responsibility. As additional species bend the laws of physics to send larger and larger fleets through the galaxy, there is always the risk of something, or someone, noticing...

Pleeeeaase let this mean that I can have Chaos Space Marine Molluscoids!

 

[Velorian]

Non existant actually we've never observed a wormhole, not natural nor atrificial. A wormhole is merely a hypotesis of a phenomenon. My statements were in relation to the definition of the hypothesis, we can't test for something if we don't all agree what we're looking for (or rahter more accuretly as Jon pointed out looking to disprove).

It sounds like we are mostly in agreement then.

Either scientists in Stellaris discovered that theories concerning Wormholes as currently hypothesised were wrong, or that creating temporary artificial ones worked differently.

Either that or if the mechanic really fits the theory on Warp better, then perhaps it was warp gates that were discovered and the press got the name wrong because they thought wormholes sounded cooler. The press often does that.

 

[King Travis]

Like being pitch black and freezing cold?

That and "interesting" gravity, if its close enough.

 

[Atlantians]

Theoretical physics is a specialisation of engineering physics at my university. You may be able to get there from a philosophical bachelor too but no one ambitious does that.

Really? Weird. Isn't Engineering Physics normally already a specialization for 'Physics'? Often in tandem with an Engineering Degree?

 

[Atlantians]

for a self proclaimed scientist you have an aweful grasp of the meaning of the word theoretical or theories. you continuously post theories as if they were fact and refute other peoples theories based on your favoured theories. A theory is a made up idea that going by our current knowledge could be right, it is not even remotely a comprehensive or accurate explanation of the phenomenon theorised about, if it was then it wouldnt be a theory any more. since we have no idea how wormholes work or even if they exist or could be created, all we can go off are theories and artficial wormhole tech is so far in advance of our own science that one guys idea of how it should work is pretty much as good as the next. i could theorise that wormholes are created by invisible space moles that tunnel through the fabric of space-time and that has pretty much the same validity as any other theory considering how little we understand the subject.

You clearly do not know what scientists mean by the word 'theory'.

"A theory is a made up idea that going by our current knowledge could be right, it is not even remotely a comprehensive or accurate explanation of the phenomenon theorised about, if it was then it wouldnt be a theory any more.

Entirely to the contrary, a 'scientific theory' is precisely "a comprehensive and accurate explanation of the phenomenon theorized about."

That is what a Scientific Theory is by definition.

A comprehensive working model of a phenomenon.

 

[Atlantians]

True enough, but some theories are more certain than others. Few question the Theory of Gravity but pretty much any scientific theory could be wrong or proven to have exceptions.

Please don't confuse a theory with the phenomenon it is trying to model and explain.

Nobody sane questions gravity; the theory of gravity, namely how it works, is always up for revision.

There is also the 'Law of Gravity', which is a more antiquated description of the observed effects of earth gravity on any given object, which is then extrapolated to describe similar effects of the gravitational force of other masses on other masses.

 

[TheDungen]

Really? Weird. Isn't Engineering Physics normally already a specialization for 'Physics'? Often in tandem with an Engineering Degree?

No engineering physics is an engineering degree in physics. A masters in engineering that specialises in advances physics such as quantum mechanics, relativity and so on. We then during the last two years specialise in such things as nuclear physics, theoretical physics or so on. After that those who wish can go even deeper and apply for a position on the university with the potential of getting a ph.d (I have no idea what such a position is called in english, predoc?).

 

[Kuschelflummi]

So, I will call my Wormholes "Catdoors"

Random FTL Tech would also be nice.

 

[TheDungen]

So, I will call my Wormholes "Catdoors"

Random FTL Tech would also be nice.

It would be cool with a system where there were a load of diffrent versions that combined these three basic techs and the diffrent levels of them, depending on where you started and what others you discover/steal/salvage.

Where the basic version you chose is more of a entry point, how your species first discover FTL physics, which will colour how they explain the phenomenon and think about it further down the line.
In fact this could be applied to all science in the game, a system where the phenomenon and technology you encounter and in which order you discover them (as well as their own inherent abilities and cultural values) shape the basic structure of that species take on science and how their models for interpreting the universe differs from each other and changes over time.

It'd be very cool with a space game that didn't just do technology but actually simulated the scientific process (such as it is for the species in question, our scientific process is after all just that, our take on it, our answer to the questions).

Say that any technology encountered or natural phenomenon discovered could be 'reverse engineered' to scientific theorems, and those would differ dependign on which scientific theorems you have already unlocked, the techs you could unlock on your own would eb depending on which scientific theorems you had already unlocked. And even the shock that goes through a society when one of the rules they thought were certain is found to be false.

 

[Velorian]

Please don't confuse a theory with the phenomenon it is trying to model and explain.

Nobody sane questions gravity; the theory of gravity, namely how it works, is always up for revision.

There is also the 'Law of Gravity', which is a more antiquated description of the observed effects of earth gravity on any given object, which is then extrapolated to describe similar effects of the gravitational force of other masses on other masses.

That's basically my entire point.. In the next line, I state that in the future an otherwise certain theory might be revised if we discover it's more advanced than we thought. Please don't tell me you prefer a slightly different word to describe basically the same.

 

[bz249]

It would be cool with a system where there were a load of diffrent versions that combined these three basic techs and the diffrent levels of them, depending on where you started and what others you discover/steal/salvage.

Where the basic version you chose is more of a entry point, how your species first discover FTL physics, which will colour how they explain the phenomenon and think about it further down the line.
In fact this could be applied to all science in the game, a system where the phenomenon and technology you encounter and in which order you discover them (as well as their own inherent abilities and cultural values) shape the basic structure of that species take on science and how their models for interpreting the universe differs from each other and changes over time.

It'd be very cool with a space game that didn't just do technology but actually simulated the scientific process (such as it is for the species in question, our scientific process is after all just that, our take on it, our answer to the questions).

Say that any technology encountered or natural phenomenon discovered could be 'reverse engineered' to scientific theorems, and those would differ dependign on which scientific theorems you have already unlocked, the techs you could unlock on your own would eb depending on which scientific theorems you had already unlocked. And even the shock that goes through a society when one of the rules they thought were certain is found to be false.

Well reverse engineering is not a magic bullett. Science and technology works using paradigms/framework of modelling. Scientist try to understand the world using the description available in the given paradigm. An average scientist might simply reject observation which contradicts the actual paradigm (typically a researcher tries to prove a certain theory or make quantitative measurement using a given model... if y=a*x offers a nice enough solution, then he just not try whether y=b*lnx-c*sqrt(x)+d offers an even better one) and you need an absolute genius plus a totally flawed paradigm which offers no further "easy research" to replace an old system.

So in game... your race has selected wormholes as their preferred FTL method. They replaced general relativity with a new paradigm which contains wormholes. There is a thrieving industrial sector producin and developing worhmole stations. At some point in an obscure system they stumble upon an ancient ship using a working warpdrive (optimal case), according to their understanding of physics this method of FTL travel is simply impossible. Based on the observational evidence it is not, so their most brilliant scientists starts to work on warp theory... now they lack the theoretical basis and even the construction manuals of the ship. Nevertheless some progress is still possible, but slow. Every bit of this strange piece of hardware is a mystery.
Their colleagues who did the safe way (improving wormhole stations) made some nice progress, they are working with something familiar which has the required support from industry, military and the scientific community. So the wormhole stations getting more and more efficient each year, while there is a continuous struggle with the warp driven ship. Now less and less really brilliant scientist would like to study the dead alley warp ship (they just want to make career) and at some point new Wormhole Station Mk XI from Galactic Drive Ltd. just make the whole warp thingy irrelevant because it offers so much more capabilities. Just think about all those ideas for making a way better material for the computer chips as silicon. All of them turned out to be a dead alley as Si has an existing infrastructure and it improves with a faster pace as the rivals, which never reach even prototype level (ok this is not 100% true, but compatibility with the existing manufacturing process is a tremendeous advantage).

 

[Kuschelflummi]

Build a Warpdrive on a Wormhole Gate :3

 

[TheDungen]

Well reverse engineering is not a magic bullett. Science and technology works using paradigms/framework of modelling. Scientist try to understand the world using the description available in the given paradigm. An average scientist might simply reject observation which contradicts the actual paradigm (typically a researcher tries to prove a certain theory or make quantitative measurement using a given model... if y=a*x offers a nice enough solution, then he just not try whether y=b*lnx-c*sqrt(x)+d offers an even better one) and you need an absolute genius plus a totally flawed paradigm which offers no further "easy research" to replace an old system.

So in game... your race has selected wormholes as their preferred FTL method. They replaced general relativity with a new paradigm which contains wormholes. There is a thrieving industrial sector producin and developing worhmole stations. At some point in an obscure system they stumble upon an ancient ship using a working warpdrive (optimal case), according to their understanding of physics this method of FTL travel is simply impossible. Based on the observational evidence it is not, so their most brilliant scientists starts to work on warp theory... now they lack the theoretical basis and even the construction manuals of the ship. Nevertheless some progress is still possible, but slow. Every bit of this strange piece of hardware is a mystery.
Their colleagues who did the safe way (improving wormhole stations) made some nice progress, they are working with something familiar which has the required support from industry, military and the scientific community. So the wormhole stations getting more and more efficient each year, while there is a continuous struggle with the warp driven ship. Now less and less really brilliant scientist would like to study the dead alley warp ship (they just want to make career) and at some point new Wormhole Station Mk XI from Galactic Drive Ltd. just make the whole warp thingy irrelevant because it offers so much more capabilities. Just think about all those ideas for making a way better material for the computer chips as silicon. All of them turned out to be a dead alley as Si has an existing infrastructure and it improves with a faster pace as the rivals, which never reach even prototype level (ok this is not 100% true, but compatibility with the existing manufacturing process is a tremendeous advantage).

Ah the genius... perhaps the most dangerous notion ever concieved from people who do not understand science about science. It's the problem which requires a genius but the genius who require s a problem.

Einstein became wha he was by pondering the problems posed by maxwells theories, maxwell became what he was by trying to prove farraday right, farraday became what he was because he had the great problems of the age dumped into his lap by men who thought he had no shot at solving them, newton became what he was be supplying mathematical framework for the theories of others (if that he was accused of stealing theories by many of the mose esteemed minds of the age, too many) those theories came from people observign cases when aristotles mechanics failed. Some of these men were geniuses, others were not, (I will not say who was or who was not i'm not intrested in discussing that), yet other geniuses never made such discoveries. It's not the problem who needs a scientist it's the scientist who needs the problem. That one thing that makes him say "Hmm that's curious" "That's not what was supposed to happen" or even "Noo! That's impossible!". Like when Herschel tried to discover which colour of light carried the most heat and realsied that his backup (not the proper word, I don't know what is with me these days) had been standing in infrared light all along. Science has plenty of heroes but don't ever do the mistake to think that these were born destined to be so, it took hard work and detirmination to get there, that will get you much furhter than pure intelliegence ever will, and as genius level person actually studing science I can tell you from personal experience that mere intellect is not enough unless you're also diligent, which is why most gifted children never amount to anything they never learn to struggle in the face of adversity.

I did not only say reverse engineering, I said reverse engineering or observing natural phenomenon. That is either in a lab or while exploring the universe. Reverse engineering tech based on more advanced science is however one of those cases where you are faced with phenomenon that can actually contradict your standing scientific theories. Encountering lifeforms that have evolved very diffrently from us would likewise be a humbling experience.

In your example only a few scientists would work on actually reverse engineering the engine itself, bt all fo them would be opened up to considering "If this thing actually works what might be wring with our theories" and eventually they'll change those theories so that it allows for warptravel, they may not do that in the correct way but it will force them our of complacency and get them thinking, not thinkign up new echnologies that's the job of an engineer, but new theories that will open up for groundbreaking advances in enginerring. Far too many movies, games and so on do the mistake of treating science and technology as the same thing. They're not they are certainly interacting with engineering trhowing problems and better tools to science and science returning with better and more accurate models all the time. But they are not the same, if you stop doing more advanced science then your technology will keep progressing for a while but eventually it will start slowing down.

 

[bz249]

Ah the genius... perhaps the most dangerous notion ever concieved from people who do not understand science about science. It's the problem which requires a genius but the genius who require s a problem.

Einstein became wha he was by pondering the problems posed by maxwells theories, maxwell became what he was by trying to prove farraday right, farraday became what he was because he had the great problems of the age dumped into his lap by men who thought he had no shot at solving them, newton became what he was be supplying mathematical framework for the theories of others (if that he was accused of stealing theories by many of the mose esteemed minds of the age, too many) those theories came from people observign cases when aristotles mechanics failed. Some of these men were geniuses, others were not, (I will not say who was or who was not i'm not intrested in discussing that), yet other geniuses never made such discoveries. It's not the problem who needs a scientist it's the scientist who needs the problem. That one thing that makes him say "Hmm that's curious" "That's not what was supposed to happen" or even "Noo! That's impossible!". Like when Herschel tried to discover which colour of light carried the most heat and realsied that his backup (not the proper word, I don't know what is with me these days) had been standing in infrared light all along. Science has plenty of heroes but don't ever do the mistake to think that these were born destined to be so, it took hard work and detirmination to get there, that will get you much furhter than pure intelliegence ever will, and as genius level person actually studing science I can tell you from personal experience that mere intellect is not enough unless you're also diligent, which is why most gifted children never amount to anything they never learn to struggle in the face of adversity.

I did not only say reverse engineering, I said reverse engineering or observing natural phenomenon. That is either in a lab or while exploring the universe. Reverse engineering tech based on more advanced science is however one of those cases where you are faced with phenomenon that can actually contradict your standing scientific theories. ENcountering lifeforms that have evolved very diffrently from us would likewise be a humbling experience.

Well on the other hand underestimating the influence of some given persons is also a mistake. The problems with relativity principle and the Maxwell-equations have been known, so if not Einstein, then Poincaré or Lorentz would come out with a solution leading to the special relativity (they already had an almost working theory)... not so true for the general relativity. Or the problems with the Aristotelean mechanics were know for centuries, indeed medieval "scientist" (not the proper word, but leave it like that) already got results very similar to the conservation of momentum. Yet it did not condense to a theory (and we know that it must have been totally hard, while the typical pattern for a theory/invention that multiple people come up with generally the same idea in the same time and this did not happen with the classical mechanics)...

On the other hand I agree with genius requires a problem, but problems tends to arise when there is nothing simple to research. If there is enough advancement possibility in the actual framework, then geniuses tend work on "minor" stuff (because they are not really dumb and research requires support anyway).

So IMHO, that FTL is paradigm changing thing and in the game the three FTL works using different principles. So it would be vastly more easy to do evolutionary steps with the current design (with sound scientific understanding and ready to use infrastructure) than to come up with a paradigm describing the alternative FTL systems. The only reasonable (mean: not prohibitively expensive and generally wasteful) way to do it is if another race sets up factory and train your people on that field too.