In
typical sensationalist style, the morning BBC newsreader announced, “It’s
mission? To find life on Mars!” Soon,
some viewers will be disappointed to learn there is no advanced, intelligent
life form, human or otherwise on Mars. It
is almost certain there isn’t even rudimentary life – like bacteria –
there. Not even viruses. [Which have no independent life anyway.
Viruses need a living host to thrive].
Actually
the lander will search the sub-surface with its robotic arm in the hope of
finding any remaining evidence of water, and/or of fossils or of traces of the
molecules that we consider essential to the process of life – with experiments
similar to those of the earlier Viking lander (see below). We already know that liquid water once did
flow on Mar’s surface, although it no longer exists in liquid form anywhere on its surface. The new site is in the far north of the planet
and some little water in ice form may exist at the poles.
Let us examine the question, ‘Is it possible that life evolved on Mars?’
It
is almost certain that even the most rudimentary life forms (e.g. bacteria) do
not and cannot exist on Mars today nor have they likely been on that planet any
time over the past several billions of years. Though Mars is a large enough planet with a solid surface and
temperatures and pressure just within the limiting range for life forms to
survive (it did at one time have an atmosphere capable of sustaining liquid
water and has a pressure ~0.1 bar), it has for eons suffered very high
ultraviolet radiation bombardment which makes it now sterile (the planet has no
excess O and no O - which in the upper atmosphere of our Earth today protects
us and other life forms from solar radiation).
Yet
the early Mars condensed at the same time as Earth in the Solar System some 4.6
billion years ago and with not radically different conditions (life began on
Earth some 4.4 billion years ago). Of
course being more than four times more distant from the Sun, it was
considerably colder but frequent bombardment and a dense ‘greenhouse’
atmosphere possibly resulted in surface temperatures on both early planets not
radically different from that of Earth today. In any case in recent years we
have evidence of life forms existing in the most extreme of temperature
environments. Though some scientists
speculate on an extra-terrestrial origin for Earth life – and a few that our
life may have been ‘seeded’ from early Mars – it is at least as likely and
vastly more interesting to consider the possibility that life evolved
independently on both planets (with possibly an extra-Solar System
origin!).
Though
our early atmosphere (Earth’s, that is) was composed mostly of carbon dioxide
and some nitrogen, we know that here there existed free oxygen (O) from at
least two billion years ago – a by-product of two billion years of rudimentary
life forms! - and early Earth’s interior
was much hotter than that of Mars (our planet is even today volcanic though
Mars no longer is) to compensate for the young sun which was ~ 20% less
hot. Rudimentary life forms existed here
even during the period of extra-terrestrial impacts (up to 3.8 billion years
ago). Indeed repeated impacts may have
destroyed early life forms so that several independent origins are
possible. We know all this from direct
rock evidence but we cannot know anything so detailed about early Mars for we
have much less evidence.
From
the one example of life we possess – that of Earth – we must deduce the
conditions necessary for life to evolve (though we cannot yet tell exactly what
is sufficient for its evolution). We
know that life when it began evolved from the simple (bacteria) to the complex
(man) and that despite many major extinctions life has survived and evolved to
most complex forms. Many scientists now
believe that life will spring up wherever conditions are favourable, which
makes early Mars an interesting possible candidate. Let us look to the necessary conditions.
Generally
we define life in terms of organic compounds of nucleic acids, proteins and
polypeptides and we recognise that these must be contained in a system capable
of metabolism and of self-replication. So we need a sufficient supply of suitable chemicals to construct living
cells, a suitable energy source, a liquid solvent (water) in which to dissolve
molecules and a solid surface to support the development of larger complex
organisms. Previous Mars probes found
fairly suitable early conditions: for
example the Viking (a landing in the 1980s) probe, though inconclusive on the
issue of the existence ever of life on Mars, did find
- some gas exchange
between a surface sample and the atmosphere in the presence of organic
nutrients from Earth
- the conversion of
radioactive carbon 14 to radioactive carbon dioxide 14 in the presence of
Martian soil
- the uptake of
radioactive carbon dioxide 14 and carbon monoxide 14 by Martian soil
- that these
processes occurred under a wide variety of conditions and microbes in soil
are unlikely to operate under such varied conditions, but
- no evidence was
found of indigenous organic molecules and
- no compelling case
was therefore made in favour of life on Mars.
It
is these and other such technical experiments that will be repeated over the
next few weeks in a further search of the surface and the immediate
sub-surface.
But
we also have the evidence of Martian meteorites found on Earth. ALH 84001 is the oldest of these in our
possession and so the most interesting. All are igneous rocks containing, trapped within them, samples of Mars
atmosphere, the reason we know their place of origin. The meteorite we name crystallised shortly after
Mars accreted but it has been extensively and interestingly altered.
NASA
scientists studied it and concluded that the following .. “might be considered
evidence for primitive life on Mars”:
…
the existence of secondary mineral formation and ‘possible’ biogenic activity
within fractures and pores
…it
contained carbon globules of a younger age that its igneous rock
….some
resemblance to terrestrial microfossils or biogenic carbonate structures
….it
contained iron sulfides and magnetites which were possibly the result of
oxidation and reduction reactions known to be important in terrestrial
microbial systems.
….the
presence of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) associated with surfaces
rich in carbonate globules ..
On
the other hand other scientists pointed out that …
…
its grains were a factor of two times smaller than those characteristic of
biogenic processes on Earth
…
they don’t appear to contain cavities which in terrestrial microfossils are a
sign that the fluids associated with life have been present
…
no cell walls have been identified
…
PAHs are not a primary biological product: the meteorite gave little indication
that the necessary secondary processes had occurred.
Carl
Sagan for one concluded on balance than then (some decades ago) the remnants
(and remember, it’s remnants we can only hope for) of life on Mars had not been
found. But he added ..
‘Who
knows what lurks beneath the surface? Could life still exist there today?’
And THAT is what this latest space shot is all about!