It
may be some sort of cosmic joke that the only possible evidence
of Martian life we’ve ever found has been sitting around on
Earth for the past 13,000 years, hiding inside a baked-potato-sized
chunk of rock.
AN
UNLIKELY SPACESHIP
Actually, there’s nothing ordinary about this rock. Found
in Antarctica in 1984 by a team of American meteorite hunters sponsored
by the National Science Foundation, it was labeled ALH84001 for
the Allen Hills area where it was collected.
Scientists
think this meteorite, found in Antarctica in 1984, came
from Mars.
|
Weighing
a little less than 5 pounds (1.93 kilograms), it’s greenish-brown
on the inside and covered with a telltale "fusion crust"
on the outside—a thin, glassy black glaze that forms on meteorites
as they burn through the Earth’s atmosphere.
Hundreds of meteorites have been found in the pristine Antarctic
terrain, and for a while, ALH84001 was considered just one among
many. But when analyzed more closely in 1994, it was found to contain
traces of gases specific to the Martian atmosphere. That made it
one of only twelve known meteorites thought to have come from Mars.
And of those twelve, it’s the oldest by far—billions
of years older than any of the others.
Scientists think ALH84001 began its journey 4 billion years ago
as a chunk of molten lava spewed from a volcano on Mars. The rock
cooled, crystallized, and then, over the millennia, was heated and
deformed by subsequent shocks to the planet’s surface. At
some point, about 3.6 billion years ago, some sort of liquid seeped
into the rock, depositing tiny balls of carbonate minerals inside.
Then, 16 million years ago, a final assault—the impact of
an asteroid, perhaps—is thought to have hurled ALH84001 off
the Martian surface, where gravity is much weaker than on Earth,
and out into space.
Based on evidence of cosmic ray exposure, scientists think ALH84001
orbited the sun like so many other bits of rocky debris until it
was caught by the Earth’s gravitational field 13,000 years
ago and crashed to the ground near the South Pole.
TEENY,
TINY ASTRONAUTS
Once ALH84001 was recognized for what it was, a group of scientists
led by Dr. David McKay of NASA’s Johnson Space Center studied
the meteorite and announced their show-stopping findings.
What, you ask, could be so amazing about a homely hunk of rock?
The Martians inside it.
Remarkably,
by 1996, McKay and his team had identified three characteristics
of ALH84001 that might prove life once existed on Mars. Within fractures
in the rock were microscopic grains of carbonate minerals (chemical
compounds often associated with life) that were similar to those
produced by bacteria on Earth. The fractures also contained minute
amounts of oily PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons), byproducts
of decaying bacteria on Earth. And—most wondrous!—they
identified the microscopic segmented shapes of what may actually
be fossilized bacteria from Mars. One, in particular, stood out.
Here’s what it looks like:
Scientists
identified the microscopic segmented shapes of what may actually
be fossilized bacteria from Mars.
|
When
McKay’s team announced its findings in Science magazine,
they postulated that certain minerals in the meteorite must have
been deposited by liquid water—a prerequisite for life . .
. at least on Earth.
Then-NASA Director Daniel S. Goldin agreed that the evidence was
"exciting, even compelling," but not conclusive. Any number
of scenarios still had to be considered, from Earthly contamination
to the possibility that evidence that seemed to be biological may
have come from chemical reactions instead. There were also questions
about the size of the bacterium-shaped object itself. At 200 nanometers
long and 20 nanometers wide, it’s submicroscopic, about 1/100th
the size of any bacteria known on Earth. A cell membrane alone would
take up most of the organism’s width. Could the processes
of life have taken place inside an organism so small? Despite cautious
interest, most scientists don’t think these "fossil bacteria"
will prove to be evidence for life on Mars.
WOULD
THE REAL MAN FROM MARS PLEASE STAND UP?
Understandably, when you’ve got a fossilized something from
another planet that’s billions of years old, there’s
always room for doubt—from scientists and the public alike.
For instance, if that lumpy little bacterium-like squiggle is a
real, (once-)live Martian, then who the heck is this?
Among
the photos received from Viking 1 was one that seemed
to show a mile-wide "sculpture" of a human head.
|
In
1976, twenty years before the Martian bacteria were tentatively
identified, Earthlings fixated on another possibility of life in
space. A series of images showing the Cydonia region of Mars was
transmitted to Earth from the Viking 1 orbiter as it photographed
potential sites for the lander to set down. Among those photos was
one that seemed to show a mile-wide "sculpture" of a human
head.
Of course, the image caused a sensation. After centuries of watching
the skies, here, finally, seemed proof that we shared the universe—either
now or sometime in the past—with other intelligent beings.
Enthusiasts all over the world scrutinized the "sculpture,"
studying its structure, analyzing the mathematical relationships
of its nostrils to its hairline, and speculating on its tight-lipped,
foreboding expression. Some compared its characteristics with those
of the Sphinx, and nearby geological features in the photo were
identified as artificially made cities, building complexes, and
pyramids.
According
to NASA, "The Face," as it came to be called, was
nothing more than a curiosity.
|
According
to NASA, "The Face," as it came to be called, was nothing
more than a curiosity—an artifact of image processing combined
with chance combinations of light and shadow. This is the explanation
they released with the photo:
NASA's Viking 1 Orbiter spacecraft photographed this region in
the northern latitudes of Mars on July 25, 1976 while searching
for a landing site for the Viking 2 Lander. The speckled
appearance of the image is due to missing data, called bit errors,
caused by problems in transmission of the photographic data from
Mars to Earth. Bit errors comprise part of one of the "eyes"
and "nostrils" on the eroded rock that resembles a human
face near the center of the image. Shadows in the rock formation
give the illusion of a nose and mouth. Planetary geologists attribute
the origin of the formation to purely natural processes. The feature
is 1.5 kilometers (one mile) across, with the sun angle at approximately
20 degrees. The picture was taken from a range of 1,873 kilometers
(1,162 miles).
In
1998, the Mars Global Surveyor satellite took this
picture of the Cydonia area from a new angle.
|
Where
NASA saw accidental arrangements of hills, rocks, and ridges in
the scarred Martian landscape, believers saw evidence of long-sought-after
extraterrestrial life. Accusations were rife that the U.S. government
knew the site had been constructed by intelligent life, and theories
of a cover-up plagued NASA from the moment the image appeared.
In answer, NASA tried to photograph the area again. But when the
Mars Observer mission was lost in 1993, demonstrators gathered outside
the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena to protest what they saw
as an ongoing effort by the government to keep the public from seeing
proof of intelligent life on Mars. Finally, in 1998, the Mars
Global Surveyor satellite took this picture of the Cydonia
area from a new angle, showing a better view of eroded ridges and
valleys spread out along a raised escarpment.
NASA
even offered its own "Happy Face" crater, pointing out
how easy it was to create pictures from random patterns.
NASA
even offered its own "Happy Face" crater, pointing
out how easy it was to create pictures from random patterns.
|
But
not all believers were amused. Nor were they satisfied with the
new Cydonia photos. Some accused NASA of tampering with the images
to hide evidence of The Face; others simply "corrected"
for the altered angle and identified additional features, including
eyebrows and teeth, to prove their point. No amount of proof, it
seemed, could sway the believers.
LOST IN THE SHUFFLE
While some people were mesmerized by the photos from the orbiter,
others were paying attention to the more esoteric data coming in
from the Viking 1 lander. Onboard were three biology experiments
designed to test the Martian soil for the presence of organic molecules.
Just
hours after the experiments had begun, two of the three sent back
totally unexpected information. In one, there was a burst of oxygen;
in another, a sharp spike of carbon.
On Earth, both results would have indicated the presence of biological
processes, and for a while, mission scientists were beside themselves
with joy. But it didn’t last long. The results had clearly
been too much, too soon, and it wasn’t long before researchers
came up with an alternative explanation for the oxygen. The surface
of Mars, they decided, must be covered with oxidants—chemically
active substances that (in the experiment) reacted with water by
fizzing like Alka-Seltzer tablets; the same sort of chemicals currently
used to boost cleaning power in your washing machine.
The experiments were run until May 1977 with similar results from
both Viking 1 and Viking 2 landers. In the end,
the official report admitted "No conclusions were reached concerning
the existence of life on Mars." There was no way to tell if
the reactions had come from the biology or the chemistry of the
land. It was a disappointing moment, made all the more frustrating
by a history of anticipation and expectation.
FUZZY
DATA
In August 2003, Mars came within 35 million miles of the Earth.
That’s as close as it’s come in the past 60 thousand
years. But even when it’s practically at our doorstep, Mars
is still small and hard to see. Early astronomers using unsophisticated
instruments were at a particular disadvantage, but that didn’t
stop them from trying to understand what they saw.
| • |
In
1659, Dutch astronomer Christiaan Huygens recorded in his diary
the appearance of a large, dark area on Mars (Syrtis Major Planitia).
By carefully watching it appear and disappear, he calculated
that Mars, like Earth, had a 24-hour day. He was only off by
a bit more than half an hour. |
| • |
In
1666, Italian astronomer Giovanni Cassini recorded the presence
of white polar caps that seemed to wax and wane with the Martian
seasons. |
| • |
In
1783, Sir William Herschel, astronomer to King George III of
England, noticed that the stars he saw near the surface of Mars
looked fuzzier than those farther away, and so deduced that
he was looking through some sort of Martian atmosphere. |
While
all important observations, these familiar characteristics (a 24-hour
day, white polar caps, changing seasons, an atmosphere, and so on)
seemed to support the popular notion that Mars, like all the known
planets, was very Earthlike. And like the Earth, it must be home
to a variety of life forms. In 1688, for instance, Bernard de Fontenelle,
Secretary of the French Academy of Sciences, noticed "phosphorescent
materials" shining from the Martian surface. One possibility,
he suggested, were huge flocks of luminous birds. "How do we
know that Mars does not have a great number of these birds which,
when night comes, scatter on all sides and make a new day?"
Almost two hundred years later, the idea of different life forms
on Mars was still viable. In 1873, for example, French astronomer
Camille Flammarion suggested that Mars was red because of a red-colored
vegetation that covered its surface.
Essentially, Mars was considered to be a smaller, colder twin of
Earth, so it made sense to compare the few features astronomers
could see to similar-looking features on Earth. Early maps of Mars
show the planet’s dark areas as "lakes" and "seas."
"Continents" were marked, as were "islands,"
and "oases." All these familiar characteristics made it
plausible for additional Earthlike possibilities to exist—including
the famous Martian canals.

Note
the "continents," "islands," and "oceans"
named for prominent astronomers in this late 1800s/early 1900s
map of Mars. This labeling system, introduced in 1867 by British
astronomer Richard Proctor, was criticized as being inaccurate
and didn’t last long. |
CHARTING
CANALS
In 1858, Father Pietro Secchi, scientific advisor to the Pope, noticed
what seemed to be dark streaks crisscrossing the red planet. Almost
twenty years later, in 1877, Italian astronomer Giovanni Schiaparelli
revisited Secchi’s discovery by mapping the lines in detail.
He called the streaks canali, Italian for "channels,"
meaning only to identify their apparent shape. But the word already
had a popular meaning. Since the Suez Canal had just been built
(it opened in 1869), most people knew the word "canal"
to mean an artificial system deliberately built to direct water
from one place to another.
With no evidence to the contrary, it seemed perfectly reasonable
to assume a similar meaning for the "canals" on Mars.
Why couldn’t they have been built by Martians?
In
1877, Italian astronomer Giovanni Schiaparelli revisited
Secchi’s discovery by mapping the lines in detail.
|
Though
Schiaparelli never claimed his canali were anything but
natural in origin, he didn’t dispute the possibility that
they were artificial, either. In fact, he seemed to find the idea
intriguing. "Their singular aspect," he wrote, "has
led some to see in them the work of intelligent beings. I am very
careful not to combat this suggestion, which contains nothing impossible."
If Schiaparelli popularized the idea—even unintentionally—then
wealthy American diplomat-turned-astronomer Percival Lowell cemented
it in the public’s imagination. Fascinated with the red planet,
Lowell founded his own observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona, in 1894.
From there, he made new maps of the complex systems of double and
triple canals he thought he could see on Mars. He believed the canals
were artificial, built by intelligent beings to bring water from
the poles to irrigate the desert-dry lands.
To be fair, Lowell did do some important astronomical work in his
lifetime (including the computations that led to the discovery of
Pluto), but most scientists of the time strongly disagreed with
his theories on Mars. Unfazed, by the early 1900s, Lowell was on
the lecture circuit, convincing a fascinated public of the existence
of intelligent life on Mars. Between 1898 and 1908, he wrote about
his theories in three popular books, including Mars, The Abode
of Life, and his ideas influenced generations.
HOME PHONE E.T.
Inspired by Lowell’s work, people proposed ingenious schemes
to contact our Martian neighbors. One plan suggested setting giant
fires in geometric patterns across the Sahara Desert. Another idea
was to carve a gigantic proof of the Pythagorean theorem on the
Siberian steppes. And in case the Martians were trying to contact
us, we needed to listen, too. In 1899, electrical engineer Nikola
Tesla thought he heard signals from Mars, as did Guglielmo Marconi,
inventor of wireless communications, in 1921. An astronomy professor
at Amherst College even convinced the U.S. government to turn off
its high-powered transmitters at regular intervals for three days
in August 1924 to see if he could pick up incoming signals from
Mars. He couldn’t.
By the turn of the twentieth century, Mars was everyone’s
favorite planet. In 1917, Edgar Rice Burroughs began publishing
a long-running series of popular science fiction books about the
adventures of John Carter on Mars. In 1938, Orson Welles’s
night-before-Halloween broadcast of H. G. Wells’s 1898 novel War of the Worlds (originally inspired by Percival Lowell’s
work)—convinced many panic-stricken listeners that the Martians
were invading Earth. In 1910, when Thomas Edison produced the early
four-minute film A Trip to Mars, he began a tradition of
entertainment that made wild speculation about Martian life a staple
of entertainment. Over the years, more than 100 movies—from Aelita, Queen of Mars (1924) to Horrors of the Red
Planet (1979) to Brave Little Toaster Goes to Mars (1998)—have brought Mars to life.
CONNECTING THE DOTS
Today, we know that the canals Schiaparelli and Lowell saw aren’t
real. They’re artifacts of perception; the human brain creating
patterns where there are none. There are no continents, islands,
or seas, as we know them. And so far, we’ve found no creatures—horrible
or otherwise.
Are we alone—the only sentient beings in the universe? We’ve
been watching the skies for millennia, reaching out farther and
farther into space as the tools of science and technology improve,
and we still have no definitive answer to that question.
|
WHAT’S
IN A NAME?
The ancients knew the skies well, recognizing early on that
there was something "different" about Mars. One of
the first heavenly bodies to be recognized as a planet, its
blood-red hue and eccentric, looping path through the sky earned
it a reputation as being associated with evil influences. The
Egyptians knew it as Harmarkhis, the Red One; the Chaldaens
called it Nergal after the Babylonian god of death
and pestilence. In India, it was Angaraka, after the
word for burning coal, and the Arabs knew it as Mirikh,
the Torch. Our own name for the planet comes from Mars, the
Roman god of war, though the planet’s formal study is
still sometimes called "areography," from its association
with Ares, the Greek god of war. |
HOW
CAN YOU TELL IF SOMETHING IS ALIVE?
While planning early missions to Mars, scientists had to come
up with a way to identify what constituted life before they
could design instruments to search for it. The late astronomer
Carl Sagan once pointed out that crystals grow and even reproduce,
and that his car, which "eats, breathes, metabolizes, and
moves," may seem to be alive. Sagan decided that finding
something called "thermodynamic disequilibrium"—the
characteristic of a living organism to require energy—would
be our best clue to life on Mars. Other scientists pointed out
that life tended to be complex and mutate to create variety.
The unspoken hope, of course, was that a Martian of some sort
would simply amble into the path of a camera, and put an end
to the whole question. |
EARTH’S
COLD, RED TWIN
As we make our way into space, Mars has
long seemed the one planet most likely to be explored, and perhaps
even someday settled, by humans. Though considerably smaller
than our planet, Mars has
a lot in common with Earth. Both have seasons, polar
ice caps that contain frozen water, mountains, valleys, dunes,
rocks, and riverbeds. There are clouds in the Martian skies,
winds that blow, and dust storms that sweep over the terrain.
Mars has an atmosphere (though made up of gases we cannot breathe),
and a day just half an hour longer than Earth’s. And while
it’s cold out there, some parts of Mars reach temperatures
similar to those of Antarctica in the winter—uncomfortable,
but not impossible to survive. All these familiar characteristics
have lent hope to the expectation of finding life, or the vestiges
of early life, on the red planet. |
ALL’S
WELL THAT ENDS WELL
William Shakespeare
ca. 1601-1606
ACT I., SCENE 1.
PAROLLES: Little Helen, farewell: if I can remember thee, I
will think of thee at court.
HELENA: Monsieur Parolles, you were born under a charitable
star.
PAROLLES: Under Mars, I.
HELENA: I especially think, under Mars.
PAROLLES: Why under Mars?
HELENA: The wars hath so kept you under that you must needs
be born under Mars.
PAROLLES: When he was predominant.
HELENA: When he was retrograde, I think, rather.
PAROLLES: Why think you so?
HELENA: You go so much backward when you fight. |
|