BTW, Star Trek was released in 1966. Earlier in that decade a number of scientists had begun discussing tachyons as theoretical particles. Later on they began showing up as possible constructs inside newer theories that attempt to combine quantum physics and relativity.
This is all publicly available information so you should already be on top of it.
Regarding further "futuristic" entertainment shows string theory didn't arrive, even in part, until the end of the 1960s (the Bosonic String Theory).
So, here's your continuum ~ "tachyons, Star Trek, string theory) ~ in that order. Although you might argue that Star Trek somehow influenced string theory, you would be wrong to argue that Star Trek influenced tachyon theory ~ unless you want to jump into the time travel business.
Yes, yes, I’m familiar with the two experiments showing neutrinos possibly traveling faster than light. Those are different particles, and tachyons remain purely hypothetical particles which could only exist in some physical models.
Do you actually think about these things, or do words just stick in your brain and you regurgitate them at will and regardless of context or understanding on your part?
Money quotes:
#1:A tachyon (play /ˈtæki.ɒn/) is a hypothetical subatomic particle that always moves faster than light. In the language of special relativity, a tachyon would be a particle with space-like four-momentum and imaginary proper time. A tachyon would be constrained to the space-like portion of the energy-momentum graph
Please take note of the word, Hypothetical
#2:Despite the theoretical arguments against the existence of tachyon particles, experimental searches have been conducted to test the assumption against their existence; however, no experimental evidence[5] for the existence of tachyon particles has been found.
Please note the part highlighted.
I also said, Tachyons, not Neutrinos.