Astronomy & Celestial Mechanics
the sky, computed
Concept

Extreme-ultraviolet — where it appears

Ultraviolet light with wavelengths from about 10 to 100 nanometres, energetic enough to ionise hydrogen and helium. It is absorbed high in a planet's atmosphere, heating the gas there, and drives most of the escape of young planets' atmospheres.

Named by 3 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

Pluto and Triton sit on the nitrogen line, and the Earth sits between helium and nitrogen. Escape speed against exospheric temperature, with a criterion line for each molecular species at v_esc = 6 v_th — the speed at which the Jeans loss time is comparable to the age of the solar system. Every line has slope one half, because the thermal speed goes as √T; a body above a line keeps that gas and a body below it does not. The horizontal axis is the temperature at the exobase, which for the Earth is near 1000 K rather than the 255 K of its equilibrium — the difference is extreme-ultraviolet heating, and using the wrong temperature puts the Earth above the hydrogen line, keeping an atmosphere it observably lost. Three readings are worth making. The Earth falls between helium and nitrogen and does exactly that: it loses helium as fast as radioactive decay supplies it, and keeps nitrogen for ever. Titan sits just above nitrogen and just above methane, which is why it has a thick nitrogen atmosphere and is slowly losing its methane. And Pluto and Triton sit on the nitrogen line, within 1 per cent — which is why both have atmospheres that are marginally bound and measurably escaping. Where it fails it fails in one direction only. Mercury, the Moon and the Galilean satellites all plot above lines for gases they do not have, because retention is necessary and not sufficient: a body also needs a source, and needs to survive the non-thermal losses this criterion says nothing about. Venus is the sharpest case — it sits above the hydrogen line and has still lost an ocean, because that hydrogen left by charge exchange with the solar wind rather than by moving fast enough.

The gas a planet cannot keep

Escape is a statement about the tail of a distribution rather than about its mean, so the threshold is not a speed but a dimensionless number near thirty — and past that number the loss rate falls by twelve orders of magnitude. Then, for a hot Jupiter, the whole picture fails and the atmosphere leaves as a wind.

exoplanets · Atmospheric escape One planet's helium line, around four kinds of star. The excess absorption at the centre of the 1083 nm helium line during transit, against the mass-loss rate, for one sub-Neptune — 26 Earth masses, 4.4 Earth radii, 0.0525 AU — losing an isothermal wind at 8,000 K, around four representative stellar spectra. Both scales logarithmic. The same outflow absorbs very differently: at 1 × 10¹⁰ g s⁻¹ the depth is 0.06%, 0.14%, 0.35%, 0.40% around an F star, a Sun-like star, an active K dwarf, an active M dwarf. Read the other way, a measured depth of 1% means 1.1 × 10¹¹ g s⁻¹ around an F star, 6.3 × 10¹⁰ g s⁻¹ around a Sun-like star, 3.0 × 10¹⁰ g s⁻¹ around an active K dwarf, 2.9 × 10¹⁰ g s⁻¹ around an active M dwarf — a factor of 4 between the extremes, from the star alone.

A helium line that weighs the star first

The metastable helium line at 1083 nanometres made the escape of a planet's atmosphere measurable from the ground. But the atoms it sees exist only in a balance between the star's extreme-ultraviolet light, which fills the level, and its mid-ultraviolet, which empties it — so the same outflow is six times deeper around an active K dwarf than around an F star, one depth allows a fifty-fold range of mass-loss rates across the wind's possible temperatures, and a rate inferred from it inherits a share of every error in a spectrum that cannot be observed.

exoplanets · Atmospheric escape Whether a field helped, depending on what limits the escape. The ratio of the atmospheric loss of a magnetised Earth to that of the same Earth without a field, against the Sun's age, both on logarithmic scales, set at 2 today — the magnetised planet losing more — for two ways an unmagnetised planet's loss can scale. If both planets lose atmosphere in proportion to the solar-wind power they intercept (blue), the magnetosphere's cross-section shrinks as the young Sun's denser wind compresses it while the bare planet's does not, and the ratio falls to 0.46 at 0.7 billion years: the field protected the young Earth, on balance from before 1.9 billion years. If instead the bare planet's loss is set by the ions the Sun's ultraviolet makes above it (orange), the ultraviolet rises more slowly into the past than the wind's pressure does, and the ratio grows to 3.7: the field cost the young Earth more than it saves today. The answer to whether a magnetic field protects an atmosphere is not a property of fields; it is a statement about which process limits the escape, and the young Sun amplifies the difference.

A shield that depends on what limits the leak

Today the Earth, with its magnetic field, loses ions to space about as fast as Venus and Mars without one — a little faster, by most measures. Whether that was also true under the young Sun, whose wind pressed eighty times harder, depends on something no measurement of the present can settle. If escape is limited by the wind's power, the field protected the young Earth; if it is limited by the ions the Sun's ultraviolet makes, the field cost it more than it does now. The young Sun does not decide the question. It amplifies whichever answer is right.

sky · Magnetosphere

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Atmospheric escapeEnergy-limited escapeExobaseExospheric temperatureHydrodynamic escapeIon outflowJeans escapeJeans parameterLine-broadeningMagnetopauseMagnetosphereMass loss rate

All concepts