We cannot know the exact figures to adopt, but the general type of the thermograph for Mars as compared with that of the Earth will remain. The mean temperature of Mars will be lower, the range of temperature from equator to pole will be greater, and the extremes of temperature in any given lat.i.tude more p.r.o.nounced than upon the Earth. And the general lesson of the diagram may be summed up in a sentence. The maximum temperature on the planet is well above freezing-point, and the part of the planet at maximum temperature is precisely the part that we see the best. But while this is so, it is clear that water on Mars must normally be in the state of ice; Mars is essentially a frozen planet; and the extremes of cold experienced there, not only every year but every night, far transcend the bitterest extremes of our own polar regions.
The above considerations do not appear to render it likely that there is any vegetation on Mars. A planet ice-bound every night and with its mean temperature considerably below freezing-point does not seem promising for vegetation. If vegetation exists, it must be of a kind that can pa.s.s through all the stages of its life-history during the few bright hours of the Martian day. Every night will be for it a winter, a winter of undescribable frost, which it could only endure in the form of spores. So if there be vegetation it must be confined to some hardy forms of a low type. At a distance of forty millions of miles it is not easy to discriminate between the darkness of sheets of water and the darkness of stretches of vegetation. Some of the so-called "seas" may possibly be really of the latter cla.s.s, but that there must be expanses of water on the planet is clear, for if there were no water surfaces there would be no evaporation; and if there were no evaporation from whence could come the supply of moisture that builds up the winter pole cap?
The great American astronomer, Prof. Newcomb, gave in _Harper"s Weekly_ for July 25, 1908, an admirable summary of the verdict of science as to the character of the meteorology of Mars. "The most careful calculation shows that if there are any considerable bodies of water on our neighbouring planet they exist in the form of ice, and can never be liquid to a depth of more than one or two inches, and that only within the torrid zone and during a few hours each day.... There is no evidence that snow like ours ever forms around the poles of Mars. It does not seem possible that any considerable fall of such snow could ever take place, nor is there any necessity of supposing actual snow or ice to account for the white caps. At a temperature vastly below any ever felt in Siberia, the smallest particles of moisture will be condensed into what we call h.o.a.r frost, and will glisten with as much whiteness as actual snow....
Thus we have a kind of Martian meteorological changes, very slight indeed and seemingly very different from those of our earth, but yet following similar lines on their small scale. For snowfall subst.i.tute frostfall; instead of feet or inches say fractions of a millimetre, and instead of storms or wind subst.i.tute little motions of an air thinner than that on the top of the Himalayas, and we shall have a general description of Martian meteorology."
What we know of Mars, then, shows us a planet, icebound every night, but with a day temperature somewhat above freezing-point. As we see it, we look upon its warmest regions, and the rapidity with which it is cleared of ice, snow, and cloud shows the atmosphere to be rare and the moisture little in amount and readily evaporated. The seas are probably shallow depressions, filled with ice to the bottom, but melted as to their surfaces by day. From the variety of tints noted in the seas, and the recurrent changes in their outlines, they are composed of congeries of shallow pools, fed by small sluggish streams; great ocean basins into which great rivers discharge themselves are quite unknown.
CHAPTER VIII
THE ILLUSIONS OF MARS
The two preceding chapters have led to two opposing, two incompatible conclusions. In Chapter VI, a summary was given of Prof. Lowell"s claim to have had ocular demonstration of the handiwork of intelligent organisms on Mars. In Chapter VII, it was shown that the indispensable condition for living organisms, water in the liquid state, is only occasionally present there, the general temperature being much below freezing-point, so that living organisms of high development and more than ephemeral existence are impossible.
Prof. Lowell argues that the appearance of the network of lines and spots formed by the ca.n.a.ls and oases, and its regular behaviour, "preclude its causation on such a scale by any natural process," his a.s.sumption being that he has obtained finality in his seeing of the planet, and that no improvement in telescopes, no increase in experience, no better eyesight will ever break up the perfect regularity of form and position, which he gives to the ca.n.a.ls, into finer and more complex detail.
But the history of our knowledge of the planet"s surface teaches us a different lesson. Two small objects appear repeatedly on the drawings made by Beer and Madler in 1830; these are two similar dark spots, the one isolated, the other at the end of a gently curved line. Both spots resemble in form and character the oases of Prof. Lowell, and the curved line, at the termination of which one of the spots appears, represents closely the appearance presented by several of the ca.n.a.ls. In the year 1830 no better drawings of Mars had appeared; and in representing these two spots as truly circular and the curved line as narrow, sharp, and uniform, Beer and Madler undoubtedly portrayed the planet as actually they saw it. The one marking was named by Schiaparelli the Lacus Solis, the other, the Sinus Sabaeus, and they are two of the best known and most easily recognized of the planet"s features; so that it is easy to trace the growth of our knowledge of both of them from 1830 up to the present time. They were drawn by Dawes in 1864, by Schiaparelli in 1877 and the succeeding years, by Lowell in 1894 and since, and by Antoniadi in 1909 and 1911. But whereas the drawings of Beer and Madler, made by the aid of a telescope of 4 inches aperture, show the two spots as exactly alike, in those of Dawes, made with a telescope of 8 inches, the resemblance between the two has entirely vanished, and neither is shown as a plain circular dot. Since then, observers of greater experience and equipped with more powerful instruments have directed their attention to these two objects, and a ma.s.s of complicated structure has been brought out in the regions which were so simple in the sight of Beer and Madler, so that not a trace of resemblance remains between the two objects that to them appeared indistinguishable.
Now the gradation in size, from the Lacus Solis down to the smallest oasis of Lowell, is a complete one. If a future development in the power of telescopes should equal the advance made from the 4-inch of Beer and Madler, to the 33-inch which Antoniadi used in 1909, is it reasonable to suppose that Prof. Lowell"s oases will refuse to yield to such improvement, and will all still show themselves as uniform spots, precisely circular in outline? It is clear that Beer and Madler would have been mistaken if they had argued that the apparently perfect circularity of the two oases which they observed proved them to be artificial, because the increase in telescopic power has since shown us that neither is circular. The obvious reason why they appeared so round to Beer and Madler was that they were too small to be defined in their instruments; their minor irregularities were therefore invisible, and their apparent circularity covered detail of an altogether different form.
Beer and Madler only drew two such spots; Lowell shows about two hundred.
Beer and Madler"s two spots seemed to them exactly alike; these two spots as we see them to-day have no resemblance to each other. Prof. Lowell"s two hundred oases, with few exceptions, seem all of the same character; is it possible to suppose, if telescopes develop in the future as they have done in the past, that the two hundred oases will preserve their uniformity of appearance any more than the Lacus Solis and the head of the Sinus Sabaeus? If a novice begins to work upon Mars with a small telescope, he will draw the Lacus Solis and the Sinus Sabaeus as two round, uniform spots, and as he gains experience, and his instrumental power is increased, he will begin to detect detail in them, and draw them as Dawes and Schiaparelli and others have shown them later. It is no question of planetary change; it is a question of experience and of "seeing."
There is a much simpler explanation of the regularity of the ca.n.a.ls and oases than to suppose that an industrious population of geometers have dug them out or planted them; it is connected with the nature of vision.
A telegraph wire seen against a background of a bright cloud can be discerned at an amazing distance--in fact, at 200,000 times the breadth of the wire; a distance at which the wire subtends a breadth of a second of arc. For average normal sight the perception of the wire will be quite unmistakable, but at the same time it would be quite untrue to say that the perception of the wire was of the nature of defined vision, as would be seen at once if small objects of irregular shape were threaded on the wire; these would have to be many times the breadth of the wire in order to be detected. Again, if instead of a wire of very great length extending right across the field of view of both eyes, a short, black line be drawn on a white ground, it will be found that as the length of the line is diminished below a certain point so its breadth must be increased. If the observer is distant from the line 6000 times its length, then the breadth must be increased to be equal to the length, and the object, whatever its actual shape, can be just recognized as a small circular spot, which will subtend about 34 seconds of arc.
But though a black spot, 34 seconds in diameter, can be perceived on a white ground, we have not yet attained to defined vision. For if we place two black spots each 34 seconds of arc in diameter, near each other, they will not be seen as separate spots unless there is a clear s.p.a.ce between them of six times that amount. Nearer than that they will give the impression that they form one circular spot, or an oval one, or even a uniform straight line, according to the amount of separation. If two equal round spots be placed so that the distance between their centres is equal to two diameters, then the diameter of each spot must be, at least, 70 seconds of arc for them to be distinctly defined; that is to say for the spots to be seen as two separate objects.
It will be seen that there is a wide range between objects that are large enough to be quite unmistakably perceived, and objects which are large enough to have their true outline really defined. It is a question of seconds of arc in the one case and of minutes of arc in the other. Within this range, between the limit at which objects can be just perceived and that where they can be just defined, objects must all appear as of one of two forms--the straight line and the circular dot.
This depends upon the structure of the eye and of the retina; the eye being essentially a lens with its defining power necessarily limited by its aperture, and the retina a sensitive screen built up of an immense number of separate elements each of which can only transmit a single sensation. Different eyes will have different limits, both for the smallest objects which can be discerned and for the smallest objects that can be defined, but for any sight the range between the two will be of the order just indicated.
Prof. Lowell has drawn attention to the "strangely economic character of both the ca.n.a.ls and oases in the matter of form." It is true that straight lines and circles are economic forms, but they are economic not only in the construction of irrigation works but also in vision. "The circle is the figure which encloses the maximum area for the minimum average distance from its centre to any point situated within it;" therefore, if a small spot be perceived by the sight but be too small to have its actual outline defined, it will be recognized by the eye as being truly circular, on the principle of economy of effort. So, again, a straight line is the shortest that can be drawn between two points; and a straight line can be perceived as such when of an angular breadth quite 40 times less than that of the smallest spot. A straight line is that which gives the least total excitement in order to produce an appreciable impression, and therefore the smallest appreciable impression produces the effect of a straight line.
It is sufficient, then, for us to suppose that the surface of Mars is dotted over with minute irregular markings, with a tendency to aggregate in certain directions, such as would naturally arise in the process of the cooling of a planet when the outer crust was contracting above an unyielding nucleus. If these markings are fairly near each other it is not necessary, in order to produce the effect of "ca.n.a.ls," that they should be individually large enough to be seen. They may be of any conceivable shape, provided that they are separately below the limit of defined vision, and are sufficiently spa.r.s.ely scattered. In this case the eye inevitably sums up the details (which it recognizes but cannot resolve) into lines essentially "ca.n.a.l-like" in character. Wherever there is a small aggregation of these minute markings, an impression will be given of a circular spot, or, to use Prof. Lowell"s nomenclature, an "oasis." If the aggregation be greater still and more extended, we shall have a shaded area--a "sea."
The above remarks apply to observation with the unaided eye, but the same principle applies yet more strongly to telescopic vision. No star is near enough or sufficiently large to give the least impression of a true disc; its diameter is indistinguishable; it is for us a mathematical point, "without parts or magnitude." But the image of a star formed by a telescope is not a point but a minute disc, surrounded by a series of diffraction rings. This disc is "spurious," for the greater the aperture of the telescope the smaller the apparent disc.
That which holds good for a bright point like a star holds good for every individual point of a planetary surface when viewed through the telescope; that is to say, each point is represented by a minute disc; all lines and outlines therefore are slightly blurred, so that minute irregularities are inevitably smoothed out.
When we come to photographs, the process is carried to a third stage. The image is formed by the telescope, subject to all the limitations of telescopic images, and is received on a plate essentially granular in structure, and is finally examined by the eye. The granular structure of the plate acts as the third factor in concealing irregularities and simplifying details; a third factor in producing the two simplest types of form--the straight line and the circular dot.
Prof. Lowell describes the ca.n.a.ls as like lines drawn with pen, ink and ruler, but not a few of our best observers have advanced much beyond this stage. Even as far back as 1884, some of the ca.n.a.ls were losing their strict rectilinear appearance to Schiaparelli, and the observers of the planet who have been best favoured by the power of the telescope at their disposal, by the atmospheric conditions under which they worked, and by their own skill and experience--such as Antoniadi, Barnard, Cerulli, Denning, Millochau, Molesworth, Phillips, Stanley Williams and others--have found them to show evident signs of resolution. Thus, in 1909, Antoniadi found that of 50 ca.n.a.ls, 14 were resolved into disconnected knots of diffused shadings, 4 were seen as irregular lines, 10 as more or less dark bands; and he found that, in good seeing, there was no trace whatever of the geometrical network.
The progress of observation, therefore, has left Prof. Lowell behind, and has dispelled the fable which he has defended with so much ingenuity. But, indeed, there never was any more reason for taking seriously his theory as to the presence of artificial waterways on Mars than for believing in the actual existence of the weird creatures described by H. G. Wells in the _War of the Worlds_.
There are too many oversights in the ca.n.a.l theory.
Thus no source is indicated for the moisture supposed to be locked up in the winter pole cap. Prof. Lowell holds that there are no large bodies of water on the planet; that the so-called seas are really cultivated land.
In this case there could be little or no evaporation, and so no means by which the polar deposits could be recruited.
Yet it is certain that the supply of the winter pole cap must come from the evaporation of water in some region or other. And here is another oversight of the artificial ca.n.a.l theory. The ca.n.a.ls are supposed to be necessary for the conveyance of water from the pole towards the equator; although, as this was "uphill," vast pumping stations at short intervals had to be predicated. But it is not supposed that the water needed to travel by way of the ca.n.a.ls to the poles. If, however, the moisture is conveyed as vapour through the atmosphere to the pole as winter approaches, it cannot be impossible that it should be conveyed in the same manner from the pole as summer draws on, and in that case the artificial ca.n.a.ls would not be needed. If the ca.n.a.ls are necessary for conveying the water in one direction, they would be necessary for the opposite direction. But there would be something too farcical in the idea of the careful Martians dispatching their water first to the pole to be frozen there, and then, after it had been duly frozen and melted again, fetching it back along thousands of miles and through numerous pumping stations for use in irrigating their fields.
Of all the many hundreds of ca.n.a.ls only a few actually touch the polar caps. But on the theory that the entire ca.n.a.l system is fed by the polar cap in summer, the carrying capacity of the polar ca.n.a.ls should be equal to, if not greater than, that of the entire system outside the polar circle. A glance at the charts of the planet shows that the polar ca.n.a.ls could not supply a twentieth part of the water needed for those in the equatorial regions. Another oversight is that of the significance of the alleged uniformity and breadth of the ca.n.a.ls. Prof. Lowell repeatedly insists that the ca.n.a.ls are of even breadth from end to end, and spring into existence at once throughout their whole length. This statement is in itself a proof that the ca.n.a.ls cannot be what he supposes them to be. An irrigation system could not have these characteristics; the region fertilized would take time to develop; we should see the ca.n.a.l extending itself gradually across the continent, and its breadth would not be uniform from end to end, but the region fertilized would grow narrower with increase of distance from the fountain head of the ca.n.a.l.
Under what conditions can we see straight lines, perfectly uniform from end to end, spring into existence, in their entirety, without going through any stages of growth? When the lines are not actual images, but are suggested by markings perceived, but not perfectly defined. In 1902 and 1903, in conjunction with Mr. Evans, the headmaster of Greenwich Hospital School, I tried a number of experiments on this point, with the aid of about two hundred of the boys of the school. They had several qualifications in respect of these experiments; they were keen-sighted, well drilled; accustomed to do what they were told without asking questions; and they knew nothing whatsoever of astronomy, certainly nothing about Mars.
A diagram was hung up, based upon some drawing or other of the planet made by Schiaparelli, Lowell or other Martian observer, but the ca.n.a.ls were not inserted; only a few dots or irregular markings were put in here and there. And the boys were arranged at different distances from the diagram and told to draw exactly what they saw. Those nearest the diagram were able to detect the little irregular markings and represented them under their true forms. Those at the back of the room could not see anything of them, and only represented the broadest features of the diagram, the continents and seas. Those in the middle of the room were too far off to define the minute markings, but were near enough for those markings to produce some impression upon them; and that impression always was of a network of straight lines, sometimes with dots at the points of meeting.
Advancing from a distance toward the diagram the process of development became quite clear. At the back of the room no straight lines were seen; as the observer came slowly forward, first one straight line would appear completely, then another, and so on, until all the chief ca.n.a.ls drawn by Schiaparelli and Lowell in the region represented had come into evidence in their proper places. Advancing still further, the ca.n.a.ls disappeared, and the little irregular markings which had given rise to them were perceived in their true forms.
These experiments at the Greenwich Hospital School were merely the repet.i.tion of similar ones that I had myself made privately twelve years earlier, leading me to the conclusion, published in 1894, that the ca.n.a.ls of Mars were simply the summation of a complexity of detail too minute to be separately discerned.
A little later, in his work "_Marte nel 1896-7_," Dr. Cerulli independently arrived at the same conclusion, and wrote: "These lines are formed by the eye ... which utilizes ... the dark elements which it finds along certain directions"; and "a large number of these elements forms a broad band"; and "a smaller number of them gives rise to a narrow line."
Also, "the marvellous appearance of the lines in question has its origin, not in the reality of the thing, but in the inability of the present telescope to show faithfully such a reality." In 1907, Prof. Newcomb made some experiments in the same direction and reached the same general conclusion. More recently still, Prof. W. H. Pickering has worked on the same lines and with the same result. The venerable George Pollock, formerly the Senior Master of the Supreme Court and King"s Remembrancer, sent to me, in his 91st year, the following note as affording an apt ill.u.s.tration of the true nature of the ca.n.a.liform markings on Mars:
"On Sat.u.r.day last, journeying in a motor-car, I came into a broad road bounded by a dark wood. Looking up I was amazed to see distinct, well-defined, vertical, parallel white lines, the wood forming the dark background. On getting nearer, these lines resolved themselves into spots, and they proved to be the white insulators supporting the telegraph wires."
Prof. Lowell has objected that all experiments and ill.u.s.trations of this kind are irrelevant; only observations upon the planet itself ought to be taken into account.
But such observations have been made upon the planet itself with just the same result. Observers have seen streaks upon Mars--knotted, broken, irregular, full of detail--and when the planet has receded to a greater distance, the very same marking has shown itself as a narrow straight line, uniform from end to end, as if drawn with pen, ink and ruler. The greater distance has caused the irregularities, seen when nearer at hand, to disappear. In this, and not in any gigantic engineering works, is the explanation of the artificiality of the markings on Mars as Prof. Lowell sees them. That artificiality has already disappeared under better seeing with more powerful telescopes.
This chapter is ent.i.tled "The Illusions of Mars." Yet the illusions of Mars are not the straight lines and round dots of the ca.n.a.l system, but the forced and curious interpretation which has been put upon them. If the planet be within a certain range of distance and under examination with a certain telescopic power, the straight lines and round dots are inevitable. Their artificiality is not a function of the actual Martian details themselves, but of the mode in which, under given conditions, we are obliged to see them.
CHAPTER IX
VENUS, MERCURY AND THE ASTEROIDS
Of all the planets, Venus appears, to the una.s.sisted eye, by far the loveliest. When seen in the early morning before sunrise--its "western elongation"--or after sundown in the evening--its "eastern elongation"--and still more as it attains its greatest brilliancy, it has attracted attention everywhere and in all ages. It then shines with brilliance ten times as great as Jupiter in opposition, and the brightest members of the heavenly host look pale and dim beside it. It is emphatically the morning or the evening star, Lucifer, or Vesper, herald or follower of the Sun; it can even a.s.sert itself in the presence of the Lord of Day, for it has often been seen at noonday by watchers who knew where to look; sometimes by the general crowd.
But in the telescope Venus appears less satisfying. It is a pretty spectacle indeed to watch the phases of the gleaming little globe of silver, for, like the Moon under varying illumination from the Sun, it undergoes change of apparent shape. But the surface of the planet yields little detail, and that little is illusive and ill-defined. The clear-cut outlines and black shadows of the Moon have no place here, nor do the ruddy plains and blue-grey "seas" of Mars find any a.n.a.logues. All that can be observed beyond the changes of phase are a few faint, ill-defined patches, where the molten silver of the general surface is slightly dimmed and tarnished, and perhaps one or two spots, not less evasive and difficult to fix, that exceed the rest of the surface in brightness.
This very difficulty in making out the markings on Venus is hopeful for our search; it points to a veiling over the planet, a veiling by an atmosphere. And the statistics of the Table show that Venus closely resembles our Earth in size and ma.s.s, and therefore probably in atmospheric equipment. If we a.s.sume that the atmosphere of any planet is in direct proportion to its ma.s.s--and as Venus is so nearly the twin of the Earth there is no reason to expect any great difference between the two in this respect--the atmosphere of Venus would have a pressure of about 112 lb. on the square inch, and the level of half pressure would be nearly four miles above the surface. In other words the atmosphere would be both thinner and deeper than that of the Earth, but the difference would not be important in amount.
But Venus is nearer to the Sun than the Earth, and receives nearly double the light and heat. Its theoretical equatorial temperature is 368abs., or 95C, and its corresponding mean temperature is 69 C. But water under a pressure of 112 lb. will boil at 93 C, so that at the equator of Venus the upper limit for water as a liquid is just pa.s.sed, but, for the planet in general, a fairly safe margin is maintained. Here then is sufficient explanation why the topography of Venus is concealed. The atmosphere will always be abundantly charged with water-vapour, and an almost unbroken screen of clouds be spread throughout its upper regions. Such a screen will greatly protect the planet from the full scorching of the Sun, and tend to equalize the temperature of day and night, of summer and winter, of equator and poles. The temperature range will be slight, and there will be no wide expanses of polar ice. Water that flows will be abundant everywhere.
So far all the facts connected with Venus are favourable for life, even though the picture called up to the mind may not seem inviting to us. For views of the heavens must be rare; the Sun must seldom pierce through the cloud veil; there is no moon and the stars must be almost always hidden.
The Earth with its Moon might form a beautiful ornament at times in the midnight sky if the cloud-sh.e.l.l should occasionally open, but on the whole, the planet is shut up to itself in a perpetual vapour-bath, and its condition will approach that of some of the most humid countries in the terrestrial tropics during the height of their rainy seasons.