Quite so. Even the early Earth freighter ships could reach almost warp 2. Which would be either 4 or 8 times the speed of light, depending on which scale you use.

Which is why I don't understand why somebody brings up an hypothetical particle that presumably can go faster than the speed of light.

I think it was just an excuse to try and cover the it-takes-40,000-years-for-a-signal-to-travel-40,000-light-years error.

But supernova explosions don't travel at Warp speed

The science of today will not be the science of hundreds of years from now just as the science of today is not the science of hundreds of years in our past

Since the 1987 explosion took place in the Andromeda galaxy which is roughly 2 milion lightyears away the photons and neutrinos could have been affected by numerous sources of strong gravity such as dark matter ,neutron stars or black holes which could account for the anomalies.

The part of the supernova that causes damage doesn't we have hardly mapped all the black holes in our Milky Way who knows how many lie hidden in the vast empty space between the Milky Way and the Andromeda galaxy because we can't directly detect them without it feeding on a neighbouring star or nebula.

The particles that go faster than light.

Even if some special effect were achieved inside the immediate "sphere" of the supernova, what reason is there to believe that the effect would continue and allow for exceeding the speed of light for something like 2 million light-years?

Also, I would point out if that supernova happened 2 millions years ago, and anything from it traveled at 4 times the speed of light, THOSE would have been here in 500,000 years, not 2 million. So although we SEE the 2-million-year-old supernova NOW, those 4c... particles, whatever... would have been here 1.5 million years ago. Good luck detecting them.

Of course, if anything of a supernova traveled at 4 times the speed of light, over enough distance to make any difference, then starships just escape it using WARP THREE. Sheesh.

I know