Air to breathe is essential to life also. The atmosphere which envelops the earth is at least 100 miles in depth, and its own weight compresses it to a tension of nearly 15 pounds to the square inch at sea level. This atmosphere and its physical properties have had everything to do with the development of animal life on the planet. Without it and its remarkable property of selective absorption, which imprisons and diffuses the solar heat, it is inconceivable that the necessary equability of surface temperature could be maintained. This appears to be quite independent of the chemical constituents of the atmosphere, and is perhaps the most important single consideration affecting the existence of life on a planet. If the surface of a planet is partly covered with water, it will possess also an atmosphere containing aqueous vapor.
Heat, water, and air: these three essentials determine whether there is life on a planet or not. Of course there must be nutrition suitable to the organism; mineral for the vegetal, and vegetal for the animal. But the narrow range of variation appears to be the striking thing: relatively but a few degrees of temperature, and a narrow margin of atmospheric pressure. If this pressure is doubled or trebled, as in submarine caissons, life becomes insupportable. If, on the other hand, it is reduced even one-third, as on mountains even 13,000 feet high, the human mechanism fails to function, partly from lack of oxygen necessary in vitalizing the blood, but mainly because of simple reduction of mechanical pressure.
If, then, we conceive of life in other worlds and it is agreed that life there must manifest itself much as it does here, our answer to the question of habitability of the planets must follow upon an investigation of what we know, or can reasonably surmise, about the surface temperatures of these bodies, whether they have water, and what are the probable physical characteristics of their atmospheres.
We may inquire about each planet, then, concerning each of these details.
The case of Mercury is not difficult. At an average distance of only 36 million miles from the sun, and with a large eccentricity of orbit which brings it a fifth part nearer, conditions of temperature alone must be such as to forbid the existence of life. The solar heat received is seven times greater than at the earth, and this is perhaps sufficient reason for a minimum of atmosphere, as indicated by observation. If no air, then quite certainly no water, as evaporation would supply a slight atmosphere. But according to the kinetic theory of gases, the mass of Mercury, only a very small fraction of that of the sun, is inadequate to retain an atmospheric envelope. If, however, the planet's day and year are equal, so that it turns a constant face to the sun, surface conditions would be greatly complicated, so that we cannot regard the planet as absolutely uninhabitable on the hemisphere that is always turned away from the sun.
Venus at 67 millions of miles from the sun presents conditions that are quite different. She receives double the solar heat that we do, but possessing an atmosphere perhaps threefold denser than ours, as reliably indicated by observations of transits of Venus, the intensity of the heat and its diffusion may be greatly modified. What the selective absorption of the atmosphere of Venus may be, we do not know. Nor is the rotation time of the planet definitely ascertained: if equal to her year, as many observations show and as indicated by the theory of tidal evolution, there may well be certain regions on the hemisphere perpetually turned away from the sun where temperature conditions are identical with those on the tropical earth, and where every condition for the origin and development of life is more fully met than anywhere else in the solar system. Whether Venus has water distributed as on the earth we do not know, as her surface is never seen, owing to dense clouds under which she is always enshrouded. Her cloudy condition possibly indicates an overplus of water.
Is the moon inhabited? Quite certainly not: no appreciable air, no water, and a surface temperature unmodified by atmosphere—rising perhaps to 100 degrees F. during the day, which is a fortnight in length, and falling at night to 300 degrees below zero, if not lower.
Is Mars inhabited? The probable surface temperature is much lower than the earth's, because Mars receives only half as much solar heat as we do; and more important still, the atmosphere of Mars is neither so dense nor so extensive as our own. Seasons on Mars are established, much the same as here, except that they are nearly twice as long as ours; and alternate shrinking and enlarging of the polar caps keeps even pace with the seasons, thereby indicating a certainty of atmosphere whose equatorial and polar circulation transports the moisture poleward to form the snow and ice of which the polar caps no doubt consist.
There is a variety of evidence pointing to an atmosphere on Mars of one-third to one-half the density of our own: an atmosphere in which free hydrogen could not exist, although other gases might. The spectroscopic evidence of water vapor in the Martian atmosphere is not very strong. It is very doubtful whether water exists on Mars in large bodies: quite certainly not as oceans, though the evidence of many small "lakes" is pretty well made out. With very little water, a thin atmosphere and a zero temperature, is Mars likely to be inhabited at the present time? The chances are rather against it. If, however, the past development of the planet has progressed in the way usually considered as probable, we may be practically certain that Mars has been inhabited in the past, when water was more abundant, and the atmosphere more dense so as to retain and diffuse the solar heat.
Biologists tell me that they hardly know enough regarding the extreme adaptability of organisms to environment to enable them to say whether life on such a planet as Mars would or would not keep on functioning with secular changes of moisture and temperature. The survival of a race might be insured against extremely low temperatures by dwelling in sub-Martian caves, and sufficient water might be preserved by conceivable engineering and mechanical schemes; but the secular reduction of the quantity and pressure of atmosphere—it is not easy to see how a race even more advanced than ourselves could maintain itself alive under serious lack of an element so vital to existence. Both Wallace, the great biologist, and Arrhenius, the eminent chemist (but biologist, astronomer, and physicist as well), both reject the habitation theory of Mars, regarding the so-called canals as quite like the luminous streaks on the moon; that is, cracks in the volcanic crust caused by internal strains due to the heated interior. Wallace, indeed, argues that the planet is absolutely uninhabitable.