The Case for Hollow Rock Spaceships: A Cheaper and Smarter Option

Many theories about the extraterrestrial origin of Oumuamua often amount to little more than wild speculation, sparked perhaps by the allure of science fiction and the allure of the star wars mythos. However, there is a certain level of intrigue in the idea of why spaceships have to be metallic. Why not simply hollow out a large rock and use it as a spacecraft? The reasoning behind this inquiry is multifaceted, touching on the practical aspects of construction, maintenance, and overall efficiency.

Cost and Launchability

The primary argument in favor of constructing a spaceship out of a large rock is that it may be cheaper and easier to launch such a ship compared to a metallic one. Traditional metallic spaceships require extensive material and labor to construct and launch. In contrast, rocks could potentially be collected from celestial bodies and modified into a workable spacecraft with less effort and cost. This argument is often supported by the idea that launching materials into space is inherently more expensive than deploying materials created in space.

The Challenges of Hollowing Out Rocks

While the idea of hollowing out a rock or asteroid might seem appealing, the challenges involved are significant. Hollowing out a rock or asteroid requires meticulous surveying, sealing of cracks and weak points, and installing necessary bracing to ensure structural integrity. These processes would likely be much more expensive and time-consuming than reinforcing a metallic structure. Additionally, the effort required to hollow out a rock and ensure its structural stability might exceed the cost of building a reinforced metallic ship altogether.

Practical Considerations

Rocks, no matter how large, are not ideal materials for spacecraft construction due to their inherent imperfections. Natural materials like asteroids and comets may come with cracks, fissures, and other imperfections that are beyond the control of the builders. Any pre-existing imperfections could potentially compromise the structural integrity of the spacecraft. To mitigate these risks, significant work would be required to line the interior of the rock with a more suitable material, which would only add to the overall cost and complexity of the project.

Propulsion and Artificiality

If the extraterrestrial object, like Oumuamua, is limited in its propulsion power, it would be illogical to use a large rock as the hull of a spacecraft. The irregularities present in a natural rock make it inherently artificial and more complex to maintain in space. A purpose-built spacecraft would have more predictable properties and would be safer and more reliable. The fractures in a natural rock could allow internal pressure to escape, leading to potential structural failures under pressure. Furthermore, the balance center and mass distribution of a purpose-built craft are more likely to be symmetrical and optimal, which is crucial for long-term space travel, especially when traversing through planetary systems.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the idea of hollowing out a large rock to serve as a spacecraft is a compelling concept. However, the practical challenges and benefits of such an approach must be carefully considered. From cost and labor to structural integrity and performance, the advantages of a purpose-built metal spacecraft often outweigh the potential benefits of using a natural rock. The theoretical and practical aspects discussed in Arthur C. Clarke’s work provide a valuable perspective on the future of space exploration, emphasizing the importance of crafted, purpose-built spaceships.

References:

Arthur C. Clarke, 2001: A Space Odyssey Clarke's prediction of an artificial interstellar object as a precursor to Oumuamua