But does that mean there are as many universes one layer up from each layer of organisms as there are organisms in any of those universes

Not gonna lie, 'Nemesis' is a hell of a name for it.

Spotting a "small" dark object against bright stars - which will necessarily be at a fantastic distance - isn't going to be easy. Even if it turns out to be closer to the size of Neptune than Pluto.

[deleted]

The last study I saw estimated 7 interstellar system objects of Oumuamua's type per year https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.03289. Even if they were all suitable for conversion to a long term space craft, that's only 7 chances per year of an object on a trajectory that will intersect with something worth travelling to.

Oumuamua was fast relatively speaking. It was about 3 times as fast as the vehicle sent to the comet. Which means that Oumuamua was travelling at 0.0127% of the speed of light. So it will take 8000 years to travel 1 light year.

There are only 12 to 15 stars within a 10 light year radius of earth. So assuming we can build an 80,000 year craft out of our asteroid (when we can't build a dishwasher that lasts 5 (not a specific example, honest)), the chance of finding one on a suitable trajectory is effectively zero.

[removed]

>“If we want to warm up the atmosphere of Mars, what if we use global warming?”

but we can't even pluck the CO2 out of Earth's already incredibly useful atmosphere.

​

trying to make something useful out of "nothing" is much much harder.

​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming

Terraforming or terraformation ("Earth-shaping") is the hypothetical process of deliberately modifying the atmosphere, temperature, surface topography or ecology of a planet, moon, or other body to be similar to the environment of Earth to make it habitable for humans to live on.

[removed]

And where is it going? What resources does it contain? Is it even stable enough for mining, "colonizing" or propulsion? Were we able to catch up with it and land on it like on Bennu, an asteroid in our ecliptic plane whose orbit is relatively easy to reach from Earth?

We can't even send people to Mars and have them survive there.

It would be way easier (but still very hard to impossible) to go find a fitting asteroid in our neighborhood and turn that into a spaceship and accelerate it out of the solar system when everything is in place, than trying to catch a ride on some unknown object on a pretty unknown trajectory.

Here is a great website that will teach you all about this interesting stuff...and crush your dreams.

Atomic Rockets!

http://projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/

Materials from what, the asteroid? What is this magical asteroid, that is somehow travelling exactly where you want it to be going, made of?

Using your smooth brain logic, why don't we just attach big engines to one side of the Earth and use the entire planet as a spaceship?

Hi Beaver_Sauce,

It looks like your comment closely matches the famous quote:

"I know not all that may be coming, but be it what it will, I'll go to it laughing." - Herman Melville,

I'm a bot and this action was automatic Project source.

Aka space and access to materials that could allow for farming

Neanderthals have existed longer than Homo Sapiens have. You're assuming that the path we took is a normal and expected path. Why?

The way I see it, the path we took was very unlikely and most humans during the "cavemen era" did not agree to it considering we find evidence of "civilised" humans replacing and subsuming most hunter-gatherer human groups throughout the past 10k years, like how Middle-Eastern Neolithic farmers migrated to Europe and almost entirely replaced Western European Hunter-Gatherers and turned them into second-class citizens in the societies they created. Due to this, most biggest ancestral influence of Europeans comes from these Middle-Eastern farmers and not the indigenous Western European Hunter-Gatherers. These farmers were so influential, they're responsible for giving Europeans very pale skin (in comparison to the dark-skinned WEHG) and advanced (for its time) agriculture. And it wasn't just in Europe they did this, they also went into North-East Africa and Ethiopians/Somalis/Eritreans are about 40-60% Western Eurasian in genetic heritage.

If humans were more solitary like Neanderthals, then perhaps our agricultural and "civilised" ancestors would have stayed in small groups which would prevent civilisation that would could allow calculus to be discovered/invented (depending on your perspective of mathematics). But they didn't, they were known for having large tribes, large-scale migrations, trade routes that went across seas, tribal alliances to take over other human groups and then eventually agriculture and civilisation. I don't see this as part of what makes us intelligent because Neanderthals may have been as intelligent as us and yet they stayed in small groups and everything they made came from the local environment.

Also, Homo Erectus may not have been exactly as intelligent as we are, but they were still quite intelligent and they've existed far, far longer than we have with similar bodies that could allow tool-making and potentially language. They could still have come up with agriculture and civilisation and metal-working, but they didn't. Did they really not have enough time, or did they just not want to?

How does the inside of an asteroid have land for farming? This is one of the stupidest things I've ever come across. Protection from the elements of space? How? you've dug in to the asteroid!

Put the bong down.

Well, I'll just live out the rest of my life over here while you're waiting for another interstellar object to pass by our planet, in our lifetime.

Bennu was going 67,000km/h

Oum is something like 20,000km/h faster.

We can’t do it yet.

Yet.

Seriously. SR 2 taught me about travel in 3 dimensional space

We have, but you're talking about interstellar (as in between the stars, or solar system to solar system) travel. The majority of the asteroids we have access to are locked up in the belt between Mars and Jupiter. We occasionally see comets, but they're not stable enough to sustain is, and then we have the forementioned need to get going at least as far as it is.

Something like ʻOumuamua, the "interstellar" object that moved through our solar system a few years back would be more on track with what you're thinking of. But that doesn't mean we could catch it. ʻOumuamua was 'tumbling' , as in it didn't have a fixed axis we could really locate to even think about trying to run up alongside it.

This is exactly the right answer. If you can catch it you have already done all the work and expended the energy to match it's course. You need nothing else. The asteroid would provide zero benefit. This is pretty easy to explain even in calculous.

Indeed so it’s not like stars can get closer or further away from our sun very easily or quickly, from our perspective anyway.

I cba reiterating but I think there are many more benefits. Look at my responses to the top comments

I explained it in other comments and I cba reiterating but I think there are more benefits than just matching it’s speed with a single craft

If you could generate enough delta-V to match the velocity then the asteroid would be useless. You have already done all the work. It would even be a hindrance because it would almost certainly not be going exactly where you want to go. Thus costing an immense amount of propellant and fuel.

I wouldn’t worry so much about turning the asteroid so much as I would be worried about getting off when i’m where I want to be. But at least in my scenario you could get off how you got on and you don’t need to take enough fuel with you to get off, you get it when you’re on the asteroid