pith. sign in

arxiv: 2506.20538 · v2 · submitted 2025-06-25 · 🌌 astro-ph.CO · hep-ph· hep-th

Schwinger effect in axion inflation on a lattice

Oksana Iarygina , Evangelos I. Sfakianakis , Axel Brandenburg This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 07:53 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.CO hep-phhep-th
keywords axion inflationSchwinger effectlattice simulationsmagnetogenesisgauge fieldsbackreactionblazar observations
0
0 comments X

The pith

Schwinger pair production saturates gauge field growth during axion inflation before strong magnetogenesis can occur.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper runs the first lattice simulations of the nonlinear stage after axion inflation that include currents from Schwinger pair production in the amplified electric fields. These currents produce universal values of conductivity and magnetic field strength once backreaction sets in, after which gauge field production quenches. The result is that the electric and magnetic fields never reach the amplitudes previously estimated without the Schwinger effect, weakening the case that axion inflation can explain the intergalactic magnetic fields inferred from blazar observations.

Core claim

When Schwinger currents are evolved self-consistently on the lattice, the tachyonically amplified gauge fields generate a conductivity that reaches a universal value at the onset of strong backreaction; this quenches further gauge-field growth at a correspondingly universal magnetic-field amplitude, independent of the precise initial conditions within the explored range.

What carries the argument

The lattice implementation of the Schwinger current, which sources the gauge-field equation from the pair-production rate in strong electric fields and thereby enforces backreaction.

If this is right

  • Gauge-field amplitudes remain below the threshold needed to source the magnetic fields required by blazar observations.
  • The quenching occurs at a conductivity set by the Schwinger process rather than by other plasma effects.
  • High-scale axion inflation magnetogenesis becomes less viable without additional mechanisms to counteract the Schwinger saturation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Similar quenching behavior might appear in other inflationary models that produce strong electric fields, suggesting a generic limit on primordial magnetogenesis.
  • The universal values could be used to set initial conditions for post-inflationary MHD simulations without needing to resolve the inflationary epoch itself.

Load-bearing premise

The numerical representation of the Schwinger current on the lattice is faithful enough that the reported conductivity and magnetic-field values at quenching are not produced by finite resolution or the specific functional form chosen for the pair-production rate.

What would settle it

A higher-resolution run or a run with a different lattice discretization of the Schwinger rate that yields a substantially different conductivity or magnetic-field value at quenching would falsify the claimed universality.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.20538 by Axel Brandenburg, Evangelos I. Sfakianakis, Oksana Iarygina.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. The ratio of the EM energy density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present the first lattice simulations of the nonlinear evolution after axion inflation by self-consistently incorporating currents arising from Schwinger pair production. The tachyonically amplified gauge fields trigger the growth of Schwinger currents, leading to universal values for the conductivity and magnetic field at the onset of strong backreaction and subsequent quenching of gauge field production. We show that the Schwinger effect (prematurely) saturates gauge field production, thereby diminishing the prospects of high scale axion inflation magnetogenesis as a viable solution for blazar observations.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents the first lattice simulations of nonlinear evolution in axion inflation that self-consistently incorporate Schwinger pair-production currents. Tachyonically amplified gauge fields induce these currents, which are shown to drive the system to universal values of conductivity and magnetic field strength at the onset of strong backreaction; this quenches further gauge-field growth and is argued to reduce the viability of high-scale axion inflation as a magnetogenesis explanation for blazar observations.

Significance. If the reported universality and quenching values prove robust under continuum extrapolation, the work supplies a concrete numerical bound on gauge-field amplification in axion inflation, tightening constraints on magnetogenesis scenarios. The lattice approach to capturing the coupled axion-gauge-Schwinger dynamics is a methodological advance over analytic estimates, and the parameter-independent saturation result, if confirmed, offers a falsifiable prediction for the maximum achievable magnetic field.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4] §4 (Numerical results), paragraph on universal values: the claim that conductivity and magnetic field reach universal saturation independent of initial parameters rests on the lattice implementation of the Schwinger current; without shown convergence under refinement of lattice spacing a and volume, or explicit error bars from multiple resolutions, it remains possible that the reported quenching point is a discretization artifact rather than a physical outcome.
  2. [§3.2] §3.2 (Lattice implementation of Schwinger current): the functional form chosen for the pair-production rate (standard Schwinger formula or lattice-regularized variant) and the manner in which the resulting current is discretized and fed back into the gauge-field equations are load-bearing for the central claim; the exponential sensitivity to local field strength makes the result vulnerable to lattice-scale errors unless a continuum extrapolation is demonstrated.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Figure 3] Figure 3 caption: the plotted time evolution of conductivity would benefit from an inset or additional panel showing the same quantities at two different lattice spacings to visually support the universality claim.
  2. [Introduction] Introduction, paragraph 2: the statement that the Schwinger effect 'prematurely saturates' production should be qualified with a brief reference to the specific backreaction threshold used in the simulations.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive evaluation of our work and for the constructive major comments. We respond to each point below, indicating the revisions we will make to the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4] §4 (Numerical results), paragraph on universal values: the claim that conductivity and magnetic field reach universal saturation independent of initial parameters rests on the lattice implementation of the Schwinger current; without shown convergence under refinement of lattice spacing a and volume, or explicit error bars from multiple resolutions, it remains possible that the reported quenching point is a discretization artifact rather than a physical outcome.

    Authors: We agree that without explicit convergence tests, the universality could potentially be influenced by lattice artifacts. The manuscript currently presents results from a single set of lattice parameters without showing refinement studies or error bars. To address this, we will add convergence tests by performing simulations at multiple lattice spacings and volumes, and include error bars in the revised version. We expect these tests to confirm the robustness of the saturation values, as the physical backreaction mechanism should be independent of the discretization scale. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§3.2] §3.2 (Lattice implementation of Schwinger current): the functional form chosen for the pair-production rate (standard Schwinger formula or lattice-regularized variant) and the manner in which the resulting current is discretized and fed back into the gauge-field equations are load-bearing for the central claim; the exponential sensitivity to local field strength makes the result vulnerable to lattice-scale errors unless a continuum extrapolation is demonstrated.

    Authors: We acknowledge the importance of the specific implementation details given the exponential dependence in the Schwinger rate. The manuscript uses the standard Schwinger formula without additional lattice regularization beyond the inherent lattice cutoff, and the current is fed back using a standard discretization. We will revise §3.2 to provide a more detailed description of the numerical implementation and any approximations made. Additionally, we will include a discussion of lattice artifacts and preliminary checks on the sensitivity to lattice spacing. A complete continuum extrapolation is computationally intensive and not fully presented here, but we will outline how the results support the physical interpretation and note this as a direction for future work. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: results emerge from direct lattice evolution

full rationale

The paper reports outcomes from self-consistent numerical integration of the axion-gauge system on a lattice with added Schwinger pair-production currents. The universal conductivity and magnetic-field values at quenching are dynamical results of the nonlinear evolution, not parameters fitted to the target observables nor quantities defined in terms of themselves. The Schwinger current employs the standard formula discretized on the lattice; no load-bearing step reduces the central saturation claim to an input by construction, self-citation chain, or ansatz smuggling. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available; the precise form of the Schwinger current term, the lattice discretization, and any auxiliary parameters are not specified.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard lattice discretization of gauge fields and axion dynamics is sufficient to capture the nonlinear backreaction.
    Invoked implicitly by performing lattice simulations.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5618 in / 1150 out tokens · 15454 ms · 2026-05-19T07:53:55.990201+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel echoes
    ?
    echoes

    ECHOES: this paper passage has the same mathematical shape or conceptual pattern as the Recognition theorem, but is not a direct formal dependency.

    By examining the equation of motion for the gauge field (Eq. 3) we see two competing terms: (α/f)(∂τϕ)B supports the tachyonic amplification, whereas the current J=σEE opposes it... backreaction from Schwinger pair production occurs at σE∼10^{-3}mPl... B∼6π²(αmPl/f)H²∼10^{-6}mPl². Intriguingly, the above estimates... are consistently supported by a wide range of simulations.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/AbsoluteFloorClosure.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear
    ?
    unclear

    Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

    We present the first lattice simulations of the nonlinear evolution after axion inflation by self-consistently incorporating currents arising from Schwinger pair production... leading to universal values for the conductivity and magnetic field at the onset of strong backreaction

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Gravitational waves from axion inflation in the gradient expansion formalism. Part I. Pure axion inflation

    astro-ph.CO 2025-08 conditional novelty 7.0

    In pure axion inflation, detectable gravitational wave signals arise only in parameter regions with strong backreaction that violate the upper bound on ΔN_eff.

  2. Axion Inflation from Heavy-Fermion One-Loop Effects

    hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    One-loop integration of a heavy fermion with inflaton-dependent mass in axion inflation generates localized gauge-field production and a detectable chiral gravitational-wave signal in the deci-hertz range.

  3. Gravitational waves from axion inflation in the gradient expansion formalism. Part II. Fermionic axion inflation

    astro-ph.CO 2025-09 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Schwinger fermion production in axion inflation damps gauge fields, enabling observable primordial gravitational waves in LISA/ET bands while satisfying ΔN_eff limits and identifying a new damped-oscillation backreact...

  4. Suppressed Magnetogenesis from Ultralight Dark Matter due to Finite Conductivity

    astro-ph.CO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Finite conductivity of the plasma suppresses parametric resonance amplification of electromagnetic fields from ultralight pseudoscalar dark matter, making it impossible to generate magnetic fields of sufficient streng...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers · 26 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    A. H. Guth, Phys. Rev. D 23, 347 (1981)

    work page 1981

  2. [2]

    A. D. Linde, Phys. Lett. B 108, 389 (1982)

    work page 1982

  3. [3]

    Albrecht and P

    A. Albrecht and P. J. Steinhardt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 48, 1220 (1982)

    work page 1982

  4. [4]

    Freese, J

    K. Freese, J. A. Frieman, and A. V. Olinto, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 3233 (1990)

    work page 1990

  5. [5]

    Axions In String Theory,

    P. Svrcek and E. Witten, JHEP 06, 051 (2006), hep- th/0605206

    work page arXiv 2006

  6. [6]

    Advances in Inflation in String Theory

    D. Baumann and L. McAllister, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 59, 67 (2009), arXiv:0901.0265 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  7. [7]

    Towards Universal Axion Inflation and Reheating in String Theory

    R. Blumenhagen and E. Plauschinn, Phys. Lett. B 736, 482 (2014), arXiv:1404.3542 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  8. [8]

    On Natural Inflation and Moduli Stabilisation in String Theory

    E. Palti, JHEP 10, 188 (2015), arXiv:1508.00009 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  9. [9]

    Multi-Natural Inflation in Supergravity

    M. Czerny, T. Higaki, and F. Takahashi, JHEP 05, 144 (2014), arXiv:1403.0410 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  10. [10]

    Natural and Multi-Natural Inflation in Axion Landscape

    T. Higaki and F. Takahashi, JHEP 07, 074 (2014), arXiv:1404.6923 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  11. [11]

    Gravity Waves and Linear Inflation from Axion Monodromy

    L. McAllister, E. Silverstein, and A. Westphal, Phys. Rev. D 82, 046003 (2010), arXiv:0808.0706 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  12. [12]

    M. M. Anber and L. Sorbo, Phys. Rev. D 81, 043534 (2010), 0908.4089

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  13. [14]

    Large Nongaussianity in Axion Inflation

    N. Barnaby and M. Peloso, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 181301 (2011), 1011.1500

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  14. [15]

    Phenomenology of a Pseudo-Scalar Inflaton: Naturally Large Nongaussianity

    N. Barnaby, R. Namba, and M. Peloso, JCAP 04, 009 (2011), arXiv:1102.4333 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  15. [16]

    Parity violation in the Cosmic Microwave Background from a pseudoscalar inflaton

    L. Sorbo, JCAP 06, 003 (2011), arXiv:1101.1525 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  16. [17]

    J. L. Cook and L. Sorbo, JCAP 11, 047 (2013), arXiv:1307.7077 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  17. [18]

    Primordial gravitational waves for universality classes of pseudoscalar inflation

    V. Domcke, M. Pieroni, and P. Bin´ etruy, JCAP 06, 031 (2016), arXiv:1603.01287 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  18. [19]

    Gravitational waves at interferometer scales and primordial black holes in axion inflation

    J. Garcia-Bellido, M. Peloso, and C. Unal, JCAP 12, 031 (2016), arXiv:1610.03763 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  19. [20]

    Bastero-Gil and A

    M. Bastero-Gil and A. T. Manso, JCAP 08, 001 (2023), arXiv:2209.15572 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  20. [21]

    A flashing beacon in axion inflation: recurring bursts of gravitational waves in the strong backreaction regime,

    J. Garcia-Bellido, A. Papageorgiou, M. Peloso, and L. Sorbo, JCAP 01, 034 (2024), arXiv:2303.13425 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  21. [22]

    S. P. Corb` a and L. Sorbo, JCAP 10, 024 (2024), arXiv:2403.03338 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  22. [23]

    W. D. Garretson, G. B. Field, and S. M. Carroll, Phys. Rev. D 46, 5346 (1992), arXiv:hep-ph/9209238

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1992

  23. [24]

    M. M. Anber and L. Sorbo, JCAP 10, 018 (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0606534

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  24. [25]

    Consistent generation of magnetic fields in axion inflation models

    T. Fujita, R. Namba, Y. Tada, N. Takeda, and H. Tashiro, JCAP 05, 054 (2015), arXiv:1503.05802 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  25. [26]

    Magnetogenesis from axion inflation

    P. Adshead, J. T. Giblin, T. R. Scully, and E. I. Sfakianakis, JCAP 10, 039 (2016), arXiv:1606.08474 [astro-ph.CO]. 7

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  26. [27]

    Durrer, O

    R. Durrer, O. Sobol, and S. Vilchinskii, Phys. Rev. D 108, 043540 (2023), arXiv:2303.04583 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  27. [28]

    Gauge-preheating and the end of axion inflation

    P. Adshead, J. T. Giblin, T. R. Scully, and E. I. Sfakianakis, JCAP 12, 034 (2015), arXiv:1502.06506 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  28. [29]

    J. R. C. Cuissa and D. G. Figueroa, JCAP 06, 002 (2019), arXiv:1812.03132 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  29. [30]

    Adshead, J

    P. Adshead, J. T. Giblin, R. Grutkoski, and Z. J. Weiner, JCAP 03, 017 (2024), arXiv:2311.01504 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2024

  30. [31]

    Adshead, J

    P. Adshead, J. T. Giblin, M. Pieroni, and Z. J. Weiner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 171301 (2020), arXiv:1909.12843 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2020

  31. [32]

    Adshead, J

    P. Adshead, J. T. Giblin, M. Pieroni, and Z. J. Weiner, Phys. Rev. D 101, 083534 (2020), arXiv:1909.12842 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2020

  32. [33]

    Caravano, E

    A. Caravano, E. Komatsu, K. D. Lozanov, and J. Weller, Phys. Rev. D 105, 123530 (2022), arXiv:2110.10695 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2022

  33. [34]

    Caravano, E

    A. Caravano, E. Komatsu, K. D. Lozanov, and J. Weller, Phys. Rev. D 108, 043504 (2023), arXiv:2204.12874 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2023

  34. [35]

    D. G. Figueroa, J. Lizarraga, A. Urio, and J. Urrestilla, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 151003 (2023), arXiv:2303.17436 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2023

  35. [36]

    Caravano and M

    A. Caravano and M. Peloso, JCAP 01, 104 (2025), arXiv:2407.13405 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [37]

    Sharma, A

    R. Sharma, A. Brandenburg, K. Subramanian, and A. Vikman, JCAP 05, 079 (2025), arXiv:2411.04854 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  37. [38]

    D. G. Figueroa, J. Lizarraga, N. Loayza, A. Urio, and J. Urrestilla, Phys. Rev. D 111, 063545 (2025), arXiv:2411.16368 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [39]

    Sauter, Z

    F. Sauter, Z. Phys. 69, 742 (1931)

    work page 1931

  39. [40]

    Consequences of Dirac Theory of the Positron

    W. Heisenberg and H. Euler, Z. Phys. 98, 714 (1936), arXiv:physics/0605038

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1936

  40. [41]

    J. S. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 82, 664 (1951)

    work page 1951

  41. [42]

    Kluger, J

    Y. Kluger, J. M. Eisenberg, B. Svetitsky, F. Cooper, and E. Mottola, Phys. Rev. D 45, 4659 (1992)

    work page 1992

  42. [43]

    Gauge Field and Fermion Production during Axion Inflation

    V. Domcke and K. Mukaida, JCAP 11, 020 (2018), arXiv:1806.08769 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  43. [44]

    O. O. Sobol, E. V. Gorbar, and S. I. Vilchinskii, Phys. Rev. D 100, 063523 (2019), arXiv:1907.10443 [astro- ph.CO]

    work page arXiv 2019

  44. [45]

    Domcke, Y

    V. Domcke, Y. Ema, and K. Mukaida, JHEP 02, 055 (2020), arXiv:1910.01205 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  45. [46]

    E. V. Gorbar, K. Schmitz, O. O. Sobol, and S. I. Vilchin- skii, Phys. Rev. D 104, 123504 (2021), arXiv:2109.01651 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  46. [47]

    Fujita, J

    T. Fujita, J. Kume, K. Mukaida, and Y. Tada, JCAP 09, 023 (2022), arXiv:2204.01180 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  47. [48]

    E. V. Gorbar, A. I. Momot, O. O. Prikhodko, and O. M. Teslyk, Phys. Rev. D 109, 023536 (2024), arXiv:2311.07429 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  48. [49]

    von Eckardstein, K

    R. von Eckardstein, K. Schmitz, and O. Sobol, JHEP 02, 096 (2025), arXiv:2408.16538 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  49. [50]

    Effect of a magnetic field on Schwinger mechanism in de Sitter spacetime

    E. Bavarsad, S. P. Kim, C. Stahl, and S.-S. Xue, Phys. Rev. D 97, 025017 (2018), arXiv:1707.03975 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  50. [51]

    P. C. Collaboration (Pencil Code), J. Open Source Softw. 6, 2807 (2021), arXiv:2009.08231 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page arXiv 2021

  51. [52]

    See Figure S1 in the Supplemental Material showing that the B field for αmP/f = 60, 90 differs by less than an or- der of magnitude, making our threshold estimates robust

    work page

  52. [53]

    Fundamental Implications of Intergalactic Magnetic Field Observations

    T. Vachaspati, Phys. Rev. D 95, 063505 (2017), arXiv:1606.06186 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  53. [54]

    The Evolution of Cosmic Magnetic Fields: From the Very Early Universe, to Recombination, to the Present

    R. Banerjee and K. Jedamzik, Phys. Rev. D 70, 123003 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0410032

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  54. [55]

    Evolution of Magnetic Fields in Freely Decaying Magnetohydrodynamic Turbulence

    L. Campanelli, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 251302 (2007), arXiv:0705.2308 [astro-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  55. [56]

    V. A. Acciari et al. (MAGIC), Astron. Astrophys. 670, A145 (2023), arXiv:2210.03321 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page arXiv 2023

  56. [57]

    See Supplemental Material, which includes [60] and [61]

    work page

  57. [58]

    The pencil code. doi:10.5281/zenodo.2315093. https://github.com/pencil-code,

    “The pencil code. doi:10.5281/zenodo.2315093. https://github.com/pencil-code,”

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.2315093

  58. [59]

    Iarygina, E

    O. Iarygina, E. I. Sfakianakis, and A. Brandenburg, Datasets for Schwinger effect in axion inflation on a lattice; see http://norlx65.nordita.org/~brandenb/ projects/Schwinger

    work page

  59. [60]

    The origin, evolution and signatures of primordial magnetic fields

    K. Subramanian, Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, 076901 (2016), arXiv:1504.02311 [astro-ph.CO]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  60. [61]

    Brandenburg and N

    A. Brandenburg and N. N. Protiti, Entropy 25, 1270 (2023), arXiv:2308.00662 [physics.plasm-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  61. [62]

    S. R. Coleman, R. Jackiw, and L. Susskind, Annals Phys. 93, 267 (1975)

    work page 1975

  62. [63]

    Heisenberg-Euler effective Lagrangians: Basics and extensions,

    G. V. Dunne, “Heisenberg-Euler effective Lagrangians: Basics and extensions,” in From fields to strings: Cir- cumnavigating theoretical physics. Ian Kogan memorial collection (3 volume set) , edited by M. Shifman, A. Vain- shtein, and J. Wheater (2004) pp. 445–522, arXiv:hep- th/0406216. Schwinger effect in axion inflation on a lattice Supplemental Materi...

    work page arXiv 2004