Paper detail

Did high-energy astrophysical sources contribute to Martian atmospheric loss?

Mars is believed to have had a substantial atmosphere in the past. Atmospheric loss led to depressurization and cooling, and is thought to be the primary driving force responsible for the loss of liquid water from its surface. Recently, MAVEN observations have provided new insight into the physics of atmospheric loss induced by ICMEs and solar wind interacting with the Martian atmosphere. In addition to solar radiation, it is likely that its atmosphere has been exposed to radiation bursts from high-energy astrophysical sources which become highly probable on timescales of ~Gy and beyond. These sources are capable of significantly enhancing the rates of photoionization and charged particle-induced ionization in the upper atmosphere. We use Monte Carlo simulations to model the interaction of charged particles and photons from astrophysical sources in the upper Martian atmosphere and discuss its implications on atmospheric loss. Our calculations suggest that the passage of the solar system though dense interstellar clouds is the most significant contributor to atmospheric loss among the sources considered here.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.