Photochemistry versus Escape in the Trappist-1 planets.
(2025)
Authors:
Sarah Blumenthal, Richard Chatterjee, Harrison Nicholls, Louis Amard, Shang-Min Tsai, Tad Komacek, Raymond Pierrehumbert
Abstract:
Survive or not survive, that is the question of the 500-hour JWST Rocky Worlds DDT Program. Whether a terrestrial planets’ atmosphere can suffer under the intense XUV of its host, or if it completely escapes, these are the questions we explore. Zahnle & Catling (2017) defined the Cosmic Shoreline, but recent observations from JWST reveal airless worlds around M-stars, calling for a refinement of this “receding” shoreline (Pass et al. 2025). M-stars spend a longer time in pre-main sequence, subjecting their orbiting worlds to some higher intensity XUV activity. This complicates our present understanding of this shoreline. Investigating chemical effects of planet-star interactions could be the key to a more complete picture of this shoreline. We investigate the interplay between photochemistry, mixing, and escape of carbon dioxide atmospheres under intense and mild XUV fluxes as follow on work to both Johnstone et al. (2018) and Nakayama et al. (2022). We expand on this work by adopting thermal structure models from Nakayama et al. (2022) and apply them to identify key chemical pathways for escape. We create a reduced C-O chemical network including neutral and ionic species to identify these pathways. As photochemistry simulations take into account many reactions, these 1D calculations are too computationally expensive to be done in 3D. Although rudimentary at best, the mixing parameter– eddy diffusion term, K_zz, comprises the dynamical element of 1D photochemical simulations. Here, we consider the mixing of photochemical products in competition with escape to explore the chemical pathways of retention and loss. We compare the photochemical model results for active and inactive cases for the Trappist-1 system planets. Then, using the resulting composition-dependent heating and cooling rates for Trappist-1 planets, we assess their propensity for efficient atomic line cooling versus escape. We follow the work of Chatterjee & Pierrehumbert (2024) in this assessment. Finally, using our pathway analysis, we find an analytical formula for calculating an energy-limited escape boundary for these planets based on composition. It is important here to note the limitations of 1D work. First, there exists an exchange of rigor between modelling chemistry and dynamics. Insights from this work are ripe for implementation into 3D GCMs, especially in response to incorporating UV-driven processes for thermospheric modelling mentioned in Ding and Wordsworth (2019). Second, interaction with the interior is important in the early phase of planetary formation, i.e., the magma ocean phase. Due to exchange between atmosphere and magma early in the planet’s formation, incorporation with an interior-atmosphere model would better constrain higher pressure chemical abundances. Although this work focuses on the upper atmosphere, extrapolation to the surface environment is a key goal for understanding a planet. Considering planet-star interaction is imperative for the selection of targets for observation. However, it is also important when considering anomalous detections of atmospheres around planets predicted to not have an atmosphere. This could be a first step in determining an atmosphere as non-primary and/or distinguishing between an airless planet and one with high altitude haze.
