manuscript submitted to JGR: Space Physics Atmospheric Escape Processes and Planetary Atmospheric Evolution G. Gronoff 1;2, P. Arras 3, S. Baraka4, J. M. Bell 5, G. Cessateur 6, O. Cohen 7, S. M. Curry 11, J.J. Drake 8, M. Elrod 5, J. Erwin 6, K. Garcia-Sage 5, C. Garraffo 8, A. Glocer 5, N.G. Heavens 9;10, K. Lovato 9, R. Maggiolo 6, C. D. Parkinson 10, C. Simon Wedlund 12, D. R. Weimer 4;13, W.B. Moore 4;9 1Science directorate, Chemistry and Dynamics branch, NASA Langley Research Center, 21 Langley Blvd., Mail Stop 401B Hampton, Virginia 23681-2199 USA 2Science Systems and Application Inc. Hampton, Virginia, USA 3Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia, P.O. Box 400325, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA 4National Institute of Aerospace, Hampton, Virginia, USA. 5Heliophysics Division, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, 8800 Greenbelt Rd, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA 6The Royal Belgian Institute for Space Aeronomy (BIRA-IASB), Avenue Circulaire 3, 1180 Brussels, Belgium 7Lowell Center for Space Science and Technology, University of Massachusetts Lowell, 600 Suffolk St., Lowell, MA 01854, USA 8Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden St. Cambridge, MA 02138, USA. 9Department of Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Hampton University, 154 William R. Harvey Way, Hampton, Virginia 23668 USA 10Space Science Institute, 4765 Walnut St, Suite B, Boulder, Colorado, USA 11Space Sciences Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, 7 Gauss Way, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA. 12Space Research Institute (IWF), Schmiedlstraße 6, 8042 Graz, Austria 13Center for Space Science and Engineering Research, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA. Key Points: • The different escape processes at planets and exoplanets are reviewed along with their mathematical formulation. • The major parameters for each escape processes are described. Some escape pro- cesses currently negligible in the Solar system may be the major source at exo- planets, or for the early Solar system. • A magnetic field should not be a priori considered as a protection for the atmo- sphere. arXiv:2003.03231v1 [astro-ph.EP] 6 Mar 2020 Corresponding author: Guillaume Gronoff, [email protected] {1{ manuscript submitted to JGR: Space Physics Abstract The habitability of the surface of any planet is determined by a complex evolution of its interior, surface, and atmosphere. The electromagnetic and particle radiation of stars drive thermal, chemical and physical alteration of planetary atmospheres, including es- cape. Many known extrasolar planets experience vastly different stellar environments than those in our Solar system: it is crucial to understand the broad range of processes that lead to atmospheric escape and evolution under a wide range of conditions if we are to assess the habitability of worlds around other stars. One problem encountered between the planetary and the astrophysics communi- ties is a lack of common language for describing escape processes. Each community has customary approximations that may be questioned by the other, such as the hypothe- sis of H-dominated thermosphere for astrophysicists, or the Sun-like nature of the stars for planetary scientists. Since exoplanets are becoming one of the main targets for the detection of life, a common set of definitions and hypotheses are required. We review the different escape mechanisms proposed for the evolution of planetary and exoplanetary atmospheres. We propose a common definition for the different escape mechanisms, and we show the important parameters to take into account when evalu- ating the escape at a planet in time. We show that the paradigm of the magnetic field as an atmospheric shield should be changed and that recent work on the history of Xenon in Earth's atmosphere gives an elegant explanation to its enrichment in heavier isotopes: the so-called Xenon paradox. Plain Language Summary In addition to having the right surface temperature, a planet needs an atmosphere to keep surface liquid water stable. Although many planets have been found that may lie in the right temperature range, the existence of an atmosphere is not guaranteed. In particular, for planets that are kept warm by being close to dim stars, there are a num- ber of ways that the star may remove a planetary atmosphere. These atmospheric es- cape processes depend on the behavior of the star as well as the nature of the planet, including the presence of a planetary magnetic field. Under certain conditions, a mag- netic field can protect a planet's atmosphere from the loss due to the direct impact of the stellar wind; but it may actually enhance total atmospheric loss by connecting to the highly variable magnetic field of the stellar wind. These enhancements happen especially for planets close to dim stars. We review the complete range of atmospheric loss pro- cesses driven by interaction between a planet and a star to aid in the identification of planets that are both the correct temperature for liquid water and that have a chance of maintaining an atmosphere over long periods of time. 1 Introduction The discovery of rocky exoplanets at distances from their host stars that might al- low stable surface liquid water has led to a blossoming of studies of the habitability of such objects (Anglada-Escud´eet al., 2016; Gillon et al., 2017; Zechmeister et al., 2019). While the ultimate objective of this work is the discovery of life on an exoplanet, detailed investigations of such planets may also shed light on the evolution {both past and future{ of the planets in our own Solar system (Arney & Kane, 2018), in particular, how they came to be, remain, and/or ceased to be habitable for life as we know it (Moore et al., 2017; Editors of Nature Astronomy, 2017; Tasker et al., 2017). The usual definition of the \habitable-zone" (HZ) (Kasting et al., 1988; Ramirez, 2018; Lammer et al., 2009, and references therein), is where a planet like the Earth would be able to maintain liquid water at its surface, however it says nothing about whether {2{ manuscript submitted to JGR: Space Physics Figure 1. The processes leading to the creation and the destruction of an atmosphere. A stable balance between these processes is required for a habitable atmosphere. the planet actually has any liquid water, or the necessary atmospheric pressure to sta- bilize the liquid state. This definition fails to take into account the necessary pathways to habitability: a planet forming in the habitable zone of a star will have to accrete volatiles from the protostellar nebula to be able to have an atmosphere and liquid water, and it will also have to keep them, which is not necessarily the case for the previously mentioned exoplanets {even if we suppose they have a strong intrinsic magnetic field– (Airapetian et al., 2017; Garcia-Sage et al., 2017; Howard et al., 2018). The concept of the HZ is there- fore distressingly incomplete, which led to the concept of Space Weather Affected Hab- itable Zone (Airapetian et al., 2017) . One of the best examples of the problems with this definition comes from our un- derstanding of the early Earth: the so-called \Faint Young Sun" (FYS) paradox. 4 to 3 Gyr ago, the Sun was fainter by about 30% (Claire et al., 2012), and our models pre- dict that surface water should have been frozen, and therefore that Earth was not in the HZ. There is however considerable evidence for an active hydrological cycle and excep- tionally warm and/or clement temperatures at that period (Mojzsis et al., 2001; Knauth & Lowe, 2003; Kasting & Ono, 2006; Lammer et al., 2009). The typical solution to the FYS paradox has been to propose that the Earth's early atmosphere had a higher con- centration of greenhouse gases such as CO2, CH4, NH3,N2O, etc., in a perhaps thicker atmosphere than now (Sagan & Mullen, 1972; Walker et al., 1981; A. A. Pavlov et al., 2000; Airapetian et al., 2016). Greenhouse gas levels have overall implications for geo- logical activity, cloud/aerosol formation, and atmospheric chemistry and escape that can preclude their existence, stability, or positive contribution to habitability altogether (Kuhn & Atreya, 1979; A. A. Pavlov et al., 2000; Trainer et al., 2006). Several hypotheses re- main concerning the nature of the Early Earth's atmosphere; a major problem lies with the uncertainties on the nitrogen cycle in the past, and on the actual ground pressure that recent studies suggest being closer to 0.5 bar (Som et al., 2016; Zerkle & Mikhail, 2017; Laneuville et al., 2018). For a simple example of the complexity to extend research to exoplanets, consider recent work by Airapetian et al. (2016), which suggests that the {3{ manuscript submitted to JGR: Space Physics higher solar activity has led to chemical reactions creating N2O, a very efficient green- house gas in the Early Earth's troposphere. Another uncertainty comes from the magnetic activity of the host star, responsi- ble for the space-weather conditions of close-in planets, and expected to be much stronger for lower mass stars such as the Trappist{1 system star and M dwarfs in general. Since those stars could remain as active as the young Sun throughout their lifetime (Airapetian et al., 2019), it is theoretically possible that some of the planets orbiting them are cur- rently subject to a N2O greenhouse effect while at the same time being out of the stan- dard HZ. In order to produce a more useful concept of habitability, we must contend with all the processes that lead to the habitability of a planet, and how the different variables (such as the type of star, the rotation rate of the planet, etc.) affect it. The formation of a planetary atmosphere is a balance between the amount of volatiles brought during the accretion phase, and subsequently outgassed, and the subsequent escape or fixing of volatiles as the planet evolves.