Chapter XI

The Two Mysterious Moons of Mars - Deimos and Phobos

Deimos and Phobos, the companions of Ares-Mars, have variously been discussed or described by Homer in the Iliad, circa 970 B.C., by Jonathan Swift in Gulliver's Travels, published in 1726 in London, and by Asaph Hall, Hall was a 19th century astronomer with the U.S. Naval Observatory, Washington, D.C., in 1877. The chapter will endeavor to shed light on how and when Deimos and Phobos were first sighted.

According to the dictionary, a mystery is something which occurs, or has occurred, but cannot (or has not) been explained. There is just such a mystery surrounding the two trabants of Mars. Part I of the mystery is the existence of Deimos and Phobos, tiny asteroid-like fragments, revolving around the red planet. “Why should such a tiny planet have any satellites at all?” Part II of the mystery concerns how Jonathan Swift was able to describe or “guess” their existence, their orbital diameters and their orbital periods so accurately. Part III of the mystery concerns WHEN, and HOW they were first sighted. In our chapter introduction, Greeks, Englishmen and Americans all have some claim on the discovery of these tiny trabants.

Part I -- The Existence of Deimos and Phobos

The traditionally-accepted “discovery” of the minuscule moons of Mars occurred as recently as 1877 by the American astronomer, Asaph Hall. His discovery was a big surprise since Mars had been studied through telescopes for more than 250 years. As early as 1610, Galileo reported four of the moons of Jupiter along with Saturn's rings. Uranus was discovered by Sir William Herschel in 1781 through a systematic search of the heavens. Then in 1787 he discovered two moons of Uranus, Titania and Oberon, and in 1789 he found two more Moons of Saturn, Mimas and Enceladus. In 1846 Laverrier found the much sought after Neptune and its larger satellite, Triton, nearly 3 billion miles distant. Thus when Asaph Hall announced he had located two hitherto unreported moons on the near-by Mars in 1877, it created a genuine shock in astronomical circles.

The current orbit of Mars varies from 128,000,000 miles to 151,000,000 miles from the Sun. Earth's orbit varies from 91,400,000 to 94,400,000 miles, About every fifteen years, the two planets can come as close together as about 35,000,000 miles. ¹

In 1877, Asaph Hall undertook a search for a satellite of Mars, partly because he had tired of reading in the text books that “Mars has no moons.” As recently as the year 1862 a diligent search had been undertaken for just such a satellite, but without success. But in 1877, Hall (on the staff of the United States Naval Observatory) had a better telescope than had existed 15 years earlier. He felt it was worth another try. One thing was certain. It was unlikely such a discovery of a satellite would be achieved without searching for it.

The discovery of Phobos was not easy. This was partly due to its size (about eight miles in diameter), partly because of its irregular, fragment-like shape, changing magnitudes, and partly because of its dark color. ² A high magnification telescope such as Hall used will allow an observer to scan a section of the sky one-hundredth the apparent width of the Moon. Such an improved magnification would be necessary because the satellite, if existing, would have had to be very tiny or it would have been discovered earlier. A suspicious looking object might easily turn out to be a star of low stellar magnitude. Or it might well turn out to be just another asteroid, which would have a motion similar to that of a Martian satellite. ³, ⁴

According to one version, Hall was so discouraged on the night of August 10, 1877, that he would have given up if his wife had not urged him to return to the observatory that night for one more look. This time, Hall spotted a small, star-like object, amazingly close to the planet itself. Then the fog came in from the Potomac River. Clouds prevented further observation until the night of August 15. And by August 21, Hall had convinced himself that there was but one inner moon. The moon completed a revolution around Mars in less than one-third the time of the rotation of the primary planet, about 7 hours, 39 minutes. ⁵

A second moon, a little farther out, also was discovered by Hall. The privilege of naming discoveries is granted to the discoverers. Many names were suggested, but appropriately enough, Hall chose the names of those two tiny mythical companions of Mars in Greek cosmology, “panic” and “fear” being their meanings in Greek, Deimos and Phobos.

Ten years later, in 1887, an Italian astronomer, Schiaparelli, also had excellent viewing conditions of Mars, and he also had a fine telescope with an 8-inch refractor, He reported a considerable network of “fine lines” and thought that his glimpse of a network of lines were channels, or to use the Italian word, canali. It was translated as canals in English, not channels. And immediately there was abundant speculation as to “proof” that intelligent life existed on Mars, “proof” (or spoof) of evolution, Schiaparelli's mirage, misinterpreted into canals, was carried over into sober scientific texts for the next 50 or 60 years, until the 1950's. About half of the astronomers observing Mars, incidentally, failed to “see” Schiaparelli's canali, while the other half thought they “saw” the canals.

Subsequent observations have shown that these two satellites revolve in nearly circular orbits, which lie very close to the Martian equator. Because of the bulge of a planet around the equatorial zone, minute perturbations, cumulative in nature, cause all satellites to revolve around the equatorial zones of the various planets.

While Phobos appears to rise in the west on Mars, Deimos (at a distance of 14,600 miles above the Martian crust) would appear to a science fiction character to virtually hang motionless overhead. This is because its orbital period (30 hours, 18 minutes) is so similar to the rotational period of Mars (24 hours, 37 minutes). Deimos is the closest thing in our solar system to a natural or “stationary” satellite. It rises ever so slowly on the planet's eastern horizon.

Could Deimos and Phobos be remains of a fragmented planet, Electra, fragmented by Mars itself? This is what we have proposed in Chapter II in the part about the general theory of fragmentation, In contrast, observe the assumptions (often subconscious) by a traditional, average, contemporary astronomer. This is Richardson's commentary on the two trabants of Mars.

Phobos and Deimos are the same size as many of the asteroids. On the face of it such a hypothesis [an evolutionary capture by chance of the two trabants], sounds quite possible, but upon closer examination it does not stand up so well. A planet only one-tenth as massive as Earth could not easily effect a capture. Suppose that eight small satellites of Jupiter are captured asteroids. Then Mars, with a mass only 1/2950 that of Jupiter, has done extraordinarily well to have been able to latch onto two such bodies. The asteroids revolve in orbits that have no particular relationship to the orbit of Mars.

Suppose one of the satellites is a captured asteroid captured in such a way that it revolves in a circular orbit in the plane of the planet's equator ... But it does seem incredible that Mars could have effected two such very special captures. FURTHER SPECULATION ALONG THIS LINE IS USELESS. This is a problem for a high-speed computer. ⁶, ⁷

Richardson suggests that “further speculation along this line is useless”. This is true within his limited uniformitarian frame of reference, his limited world view which fails to assess planetary catastrophism. But on the other hand, a catastrophic theory of fragmentation of the former planet Electra by Mars, would require the capture of a small percent of the fragments by Mars. Thus Richardson's conclusion about “further speculation being useless” is a very poor conclusion, which is based on a set of poor ASSUMPTIONS. One of his assumptions is the uniformitarian motto, “the present is the key to the past”, a patent absurdity. This illustration reveals that making good assumptions is more important than making good conclusions.

Part I of the mystery, the PRESENCE of the two Mars-asteroids, is thus adequately explained in the catastrophic world view. There would be many more asteroids and smaller debris than this had Mars not made so many fly-bys near the Earth.

The orbits of Phobos and Deimos as they appeared on Dec. 30, 1960. From Mars, p. 91, courtesy of Harcourt, Brace & Co.

Part II -- Swift and the Laputan Astronomers

Part II of the mystery concerns how Jonathan Swift was able to describe or “guess” their existence, plus their orbital diameters and their orbital periods with such amazing accuracy. This appears in his work, Gulivers Tavels, published in 1726, some 151 years before Hall “discovered” them. According to Swift, the two Martian moons were well-known to the Laputan astronomers of his time. The Laputans were contemporaries with his miniature Lilliputians and his gigantic Brobdingnags.

Gulliver's Travels, on the surface, is an amusing and pleasant account of Captain Lemuel Gulliver's adventures among strange peoples and around strange places that Englishmen were still in the process of discovering. The “astronomers” on the pleasant isle of Laputa possessed superior telescopes to anything known in Europe during the 1720's. The Laputan astronomers quite assuredly knew about Mars' two tiny satellites, satellites of which the Europeans with their “inferior” telescopes, knew nothing. This is the account of those studious, wise scholars of Laputa:

... they have likewise discovered two lesser Stars or Satellites, which revolve about Mars, whereof the innermost is distant from the Centre of the Primary Planet exactly three of his Diameters, and the outermost five; the former revolves in the Space of ten hours, and the latter in Twenty-one and a Half; so that the Squares of their periodical Times are very near in the same Proportion with the Cubes of their Distance from the Center of Mars, which evidently shews them to be governed by the same Law of Gravitation, that influences the other heavenly Bodies. ⁸

When Asaph Hall discovered them, he gave them names quite promptly. Interestingly and in contrast, the Laputans had discovered them, described their orbits, timed them, but had NOT taken the trouble to name them. This is a “strangostrosity.” Another strange feature is that Captain Gulliver reported their orbital diameters but not in miles, not in leagues, not in stadii, but in “Mars-diameters.” This is very untypical for an Irishman. Why did Captain Gulliver not give their orbital diameters in English miles?

At that time, in 1726, the diameter of Mars was not yet known. At that time astronomers did know that Mars was 1.52 astronomical units from the Sun. ⁹ But they did not even have an accurate value for the length of the astronomical unit. However, to describe or discuss the distances of the satellites from the primary planet in terms of Mars-diameters implies sighting, implies measurement and implies calculation. Who did this calculation, and where and when? Swift was a clergyman, an Irishman from Dublin, and a wit. But he was not a mathematician, much less an astronomer.

On the other hand, perhaps Gulliver, or the Laputan astronomers, or Swift was “just guessing” about the undiscovered satellites. If the Laputans had superior telescopes, why hadn't they discovered Uranus? ¹⁰ Why didn't they discover such satellites as Saturn's Mimas (400 miles in diameter), or Enceladus (500 miles in diameter), or even Jupiter V (100 miles in diameter) ? Were they indeed such “superior” astronomers?

TABLE IX

THE LAPUTAN MEASUREMENTS VERSUS RECENT MEASUREMENTS ¹¹

Another facet of the mystery merits consideration. Swift goes on to explain:

... the Squares of their periodical Times are very near the same Proportion with the Cubes of their Distances... ¹²

There is no escape from the conclusion that Swift MUST have had to calculate the period of the outer moon from the equation

(Period outer moon)² = (5³/ 3³) x 10² = 12,500/27 = 462.97

which gives: period outer moon = √462.97 = 21.5 hours, very closely. Since Swift was a well-educated man, such elementary arithmetic should have been easy for him, although his principal training had been in literature and history.

All this has been known and commented upon for nearly a century now. What seems to have been overlooked is that we can learn still more about Mars from the information Swift gave us about his moons. For when he specified the periods and distances of the moons he necessarily specified something about Mars, too. He specified its MASS. ¹³

Part II of our mystery concerns how Jonathan Swift was able to describe or calculate, much less “guess” their existence. Swift (1667-1745), a Londoner, was a contemporary with the famous threesome, Halley, Newton and Whiston. Of these three, Newton and Whiston were particularly interested in Christian theology as well as natural science. London at that time had a population of about 200,000, like Tacoma, Washington, Des Moines, Iowa or Charlotte, North Carolina today. We believe each of these three were all Swift's friends. Perhaps his confidant and calculator was William Whiston, who like Swift had a remarkable but turbulent literary career.

Richardson, after examination of the tales of Captain Gulliver in some depth, proceeds to “throw up his hands”.

Thus if we accept the values for the distance and period of the satellites found by the Laputian astronomers. we get a mass of Mars about 6 times too big. It is disappointing to find it so far off. Swift made a lucky guess about the satellites, but that is the most you can say for it -- JUST A LUCKY GUESS. ¹⁴

Similarly astounded is the modern, and prolific science fiction writer, Isaac Asimov:

This is an amazing coincidence. Of course, Swift might have reasoned as follows: It was known that Earth had 1 moon, Jupiter 4 and Saturn 7 at the time he was writing his book. It was reasonable to suppose that Saturn might have an 8th moon hidden somewhere and, in that case, if Mars had 2 moons, there would be a nice list of numbers.

As one moved outward from the sun, beginning at Earth, the number of moons of each planet would be 1, 2. 4, 8. Then, too, the moons of Mars would have to be small and close to the planet, or even Europeans with their “poor” telescopes would have discovered them.

So far, Swift's thinking can be followed. However, his guess that Phobos would rise in the west and set in the east because of its speed of revolution is uncanny. IT IS UNDOUBTEDLY THE LUCKIEST GUESS IN LITERATURE, ¹⁵, ¹⁶, ¹⁷

If Swift, or Whiston¹⁸ were “guessing”, they did well. If they had source material such as an ancient star chart on which to base their cryptic presentation, it makes more sense. Perhaps they were unsure but suspicious concerning some ancient star charts. Whiston knew Greek cosmo-mythology very well. Could it be that they decided to present their hunch in the form of a satire. And if they were correct, someone would sooner or later figure it out, and perhaps give them the proper credit due. And if they were incorrect, no one would be the wiser. Bear in mind that Swift was a Londoner by residence but was an Irishman at heart. He liked a good joke as well as an artistic satire. And he did not hesitate to satirize England, Parliament, the church, mankind, or in this case, science. ¹⁹

Concerning the mystery of the two moons of Mars as “known” by the Laputan astronomers, we propose five possible solutions, and let the reader (by inductive reasoning and instinct) eliminate those least probable.

SOLUTION I: Modern astronomers are participating in a giant hoax. Neither Deimos nor Phobos exist, and these normally serious, sober scientists are just having a little collective joke on society.

SOLUTION II: Halley, Flamsteed, Newton and Whiston somehow secretly built a superior telescope. They saw, measured and timed Deimos and Phobos. Then they passed their information on to Swift to print in satire, in preference to the Royal Society for learned consideration. Then they destroyed the scope so that no outsider would realize their discovery and publicize their cryptic pun.

SOLUTION III: Sometime between 1500 B.C. and 710 B.C. the Greeks built superior telescopes. They recorded their telescopic findings of the distant Mars, some 35,000,000 miles distance, and its satellites. Whiston or Swift stumbled onto their charts and/or literatures, realized the correct interpretation, but doubted if England would listen to such a story, soberly-told.

SOLUTION IV: Mars, with Deimos and Phobos, was in a far different orbit, and made a fly-by near or through the Earth-Moon system about twice a century for some 17 centuries. Greeks, Egyptians, Phoenicians, Goths, Dravidians, Chinese, Japanese and other ancient scholars saw Deimos and Phobos when Mars was within a million miles. Somebody measured the orbits of Deimos and Phobos and timed their periods when they were that close, with the naked eye, possibly assisted by some crude lenses, Somebody left a few ancient star charts somewhere.

SOLUTION V: Asimov and Richardson were correct. Swift made the luckiest guess in all scientific literature.

If Solution IV is chosen among these five, then Deimos and Phobos were known (if not sighted) to the blind Homer, to David, to Isaiah, to Hesoid, to Romulus and to many ancients.

These were inspired of Ares, but the others by Athene and with them came Panic [Phobos], Rout [Deimos], and Strife, whose fury never tires sister and friend of murderous Ares, who, from being at first low in stature, grows till she uprears her head to heaven. ... She it was that went about among them and slung down discord to the waxing of sorrow with even hand between them. When they were got together in one place shield clashed with shield and spear with spear in the rage of battle. ²⁰

As a dark cloud in the sky when it comes on to blow after heat, even so did Diomed, son of Tydeus, see Ares ascend into the broad heavens. ... But Hera... and Athene... now that they had put a stop to the murderous doings of Ares, went back again to the house of Zeus. ²¹

POEM TO ARES. Ares. ... sceptred King of manliness, who whirls your fiery sphere among the planets in their sevenfold courses through the aether wherein your blazing steeds Deimos and Phobos ever bear you above the third firmament of heaven... ²²

Part III -- How and When Deimos and Phobos Were First Sighted

HOW. These two tiny trabants were first sighted by the naked eye, and were known to millions of ancients. Asaph Hall was the first to sight them since the 7th century B.C. This is when the two planets went out of orbital resonance.

WHEN. Our material previously presented requires that Mars fragmented Electra at a location some 200,000,000 miles from the Sun, and before 1950 B.C. We suspect the fragmentation occurred later than 2500 B.C.

WHERE. Did Swift, or Whiston (or another colleague) gather ancient star charts and literature tipping them off? Was the source ancient Greece? Medieval Arabie? 17th Century India ... or China ... or Japan? The East India Company of Great Britain had just opened up the Orient to trade a few decades earlier. Alert missionary scholars were active in that era. Is ‘Laputa’ a specific location, some specific island, city or province? Is Swift's ‘Laputa’ itself cryptic, consistent with Swift's general satire and enjoyment of wit? These questions will be addressed by Charles McDowell in a forthcoming publication expected within the next three years, and we prefer not to reveal his research prematurely, or “steal his thunder” on this occasion. But we will venture an opinion that his material, when presented, will be most interesting.

Conclusions

The modus operandi of science is experimentation. These ancient fly-bys cannot be reprogrammed physically. There are no current conditions in our solar system whereby a planet is under a known schedule for catastrophism. Beyond experimentation, observation is also the modus operandi of science. Similar conditions are not being observed today. Therefore, when analyzing these ancient events, we are not dealing with science. We are dealing with HISTORY (albeit measured frequently with scientific tools). Scientists must understand this difference.

Many modern astronomers presume to announce or publish conclusions on ancient conditions because they assume the present is the key to the past, the uniformitarian creed. But since they are not versed in history, they are out of their field (although they may not realize this). These ancient events comprise HISTORY, not science. Even the black plague of medieval Europe is history (whereas it was science when it was being observed).

Richardson's aforementioned conclusion (i.e. “it does seem incredible that Mars could have effected two such very special captures”, etc.) illustrates the prevailing philosophy of the astronomical profession. The entire profession lacks a catastrophic framework of thought, just like the geological profession. Astronomers who are not historians would do well to stay with astronomy, and not wander into cosmology. Astronomers seldom are historians; most are fully occupied with mastering one single branch of learning, or a subdivision thereof. This is most proper. But only an astronomer who has a catastrophic world view and an adequate historical background is acceptable as a cosmologist. Perhaps the historian who has educated himself in astronomy and celestial mechanics may also qualify. Cosmology is not astronomy, even as science is not history.

Asimov's aforementioned conclusions (i.e. “... his guess that Phobos would rise in the west and set in the east ... is undoubtedly the luckiest guess in literature” etc.) illustrates another point. This is the all but universal, and careless acceptance of evolutionary-uniformitarian rationale. This rationale is handed to tens of thousands of students every year without being adequately checked or questioned by either teacher or student. Asimov substituted his own fantasy (of the moons of the solar system being 1, 2, 4 and 8, a “nice list of numbers”) as a reasonable thing whereas we found even his basic data was defective. This illustrates that evolutionary-uniformitarians, be they science fiction writers or authors of sober scientific literature should question the facts, allegations and interpretations of history rigorously. ²³

A third conclusion applies to us all. We too must watch and examine our ASSUMPTIONS carefully, long before we make serious conclusions. Assumptions come in two varieties, the conscious and the subconscious. Both require equal scrutiny, although the subconscious variety is usually the more elusive.

A characteristic feature of any new theory, which does not try to fit new facts to any already established representation, ... is its irrationality from the point of view of previous ideas.
– J. Frenkel

The specialist lives so close to his subject that he often fails to see the wood for the trees. As a result, the great discoveries are often made by those who invade fields of knowledge other than their own.
– H. C. Lehman

NOTES