1)The number of canals in this list is 183, and the number opposite each denotes the number of times each was seen and drawn; (Sus.) meaning, suspected in addition. There were in all, therefore, 3240 records made of them, not counting suspicions.
Peneus 3 (Sus. 2)
Phasis 29
Phison 56
Protonilus 11
Psychrus 5
Pyriphlegethon 53 (Sus. 1)
Scamander 21
Sesamus 7
Simois 5
Sirenius 60
Sitacus 3
Steropes 46
Styx 7
Surius 6
Tartarus 42
Tedanius 25
Thermodon 2
Thyanis 1
Titan 38
Tithonius 77
Triton 8
Tyndis 2
Typhon 33
Ulysses 33
Uranius 8
Xanthus 12
In the region visible at this opposition Schiaparelli has 79 canals. Of these 67 appear in the list given above. Of the other 12, the majority lie north of the equator, and therefore were likely not to be as visible as the rest at this last opposition, for two reasons connected with their position: first, on account of the tilt of the planet's axis at the time; and, secondly, because their northern situation would make their development late, as we shall shortly see. As no attempt was made to identify Schiaparelli's list, it will be seen how close is the accordance.
Of the 116 canals not down on Schiaparelli's map, 44 are canals in the dark regions and 72 canals in the light ones. Some of these, too, he saw prior to 1894. Both sets are, as a rule, more difficult of detection than the ones on his map; although there are some exceptions, attributable probably to difficulty of identification. The Brontes and Steropes, for example, might, unless well seen, be confounded with the Gigas on the one hand, or the Titan on the other. The most peculiar case, however, is the relative conspicuousness of the Ulysses.
III. Artificiality
It is patent that here are phenomena that are passing strange. To read their riddle we had best begin by excluding what they are not, as help towards deciphering what they are. So far, we have regarded the canals only statically, so to speak; that is, we have sketched them as they would appear to any one who observed them in sufficiently steady air, once, and once only. But this is far from all that a systematic study of the lines will disclose. Before, however, entering upon this second phase of their description, we may pause to note how, even statically regarded, the aspect of the lines is enough to put to rest all the theories of purely natural causation that have so far been advanced to account for them. This negation is to be found in the supernaturally regular appearance of the system, upon three distinct counts: first, the straightness of the lines; second, their individually uniform width; and, third, their systematic radiation from special points.On the first two counts we observe that the lines exceed in regularity any ordinary regularity of purely natural contrivance. Physical processes never, so far as we know, end in producing perfectly regular results, that is, results in which irregularity is not also discernible. Disagreement amid conformity is the inevitable outcome of the many factors simultaneously at work. From the orbits of the heavenly bodies to phyllotaxis and human features, this diversity in uniformity is apparent. As a rule, the divergences, though small, are quite perceptible; that is, the lack of absolute uniformity is comparable to the uniformity itself, and not of the negligible second order of unimportance. In fact, it is by the very presence of uniformity and precision that we suspect things of artificiality. It was the mathematical shape of the Ohio mounds that suggested mound-builders; and so with the thousand objects of every-day life. Too great regularity is in itself the most suspicious of circumstances that some finite intelligence has been at work.
If it be asked how, in the case of a body so far off as Mars, we can assert sufficient precision to imply artificiality, the answer is twofold: first, that the better we see these lines, the more regular they look; and, second, that the eye is quicker to perceive irregularity than we commonly note. It is indeed surprising to find what small irregularities will shock the eye.
The third count is, if possible, yet more conclusive. That the lines form a system; that, instead of running anywhither, they join certain points to certain others, making thus, not a simple network, but one whose meshes connect centres directly with one another,--is striking at first sight, and loses none of its peculiarity
| Previous chapter/page | Back | Home | Email this | Search | Discuss | Bookmark | Next chapter/page |