Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 100 references

Generation of Surface Sausage Oscillations of a Current Sheet and Propagating Magnetoacoustic Waves by Impulsive Reconnection

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read An impulsively reconnecting coronal current sheet self-consistently drives its own leaky surface sausage oscillations and, through them, launches fast and slow magnetoacoustic waves at a common period of about 91 seconds.

desk verdict The paper convincingly demonstrates a self-consistent 91 s oscillation and wave-generation chain in a simulated reconnecting current sheet, but the natural-mode attribution rests on an unquantified boundary-reflection claim that a referee should test. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.09932 v1 pith:6MZXBS6Q submitted 2025-07-14 astro-ph.SR physics.plasm-phphysics.space-ph

Sripan Mondal , A. K. Srivastava , David I. Pontin , Eric R. Priest This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRphysics.plasm-phphysics.space-ph
keywords currentsheetoscillationssausagemodesimpulsiveburstyreconnectionmagnetoacousticwavessolarcoronamagneticnullcollapsequasi-periodicpulsationsMHDsimulation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper argues that the energy release of coronal magnetic reconnection and the magnetoacoustic waves seen around flaring regions are not separate phenomena but two faces of one self-excited system. In a two-dimensional MHD simulation, converging footpoint motions collapse a magnetic null into a current sheet; the sheet then reconnects in an impulsive, bursty way through secondary tearing, and that burstiness excites leaky surface sausage oscillations of the sheet itself at a period of about 91 seconds. The oscillations make the sheet's cross-section fatten and thin, and they anticorrelate with a stretch-and-shrink of the sheet's length as its magnetic Y-points move up and down. Each Y-point interaction acts as a source: fast-mode waves radiate into the surrounding corona while slow-mode waves travel along the separatrices, all with the same roughly 91-second period. If this picture is right, it supplies a complete physical route from footpoint driving to short-period quasi-periodic pulsations and large-scale coronal waves without any external oscillator.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the leaky surface sausage mode of the current sheet: an oscillation in which the sheet's edges move in anti-phase (thinning and fattening its cross-section), whose amplitude decays across the sheet, and which loses energy as outward-propagating fast-mode waves. For a sheet with continuously varying magnetic field, its phase speed is the maximum tube speed $c_T(x) = c_S(x)v_A(x)/\sqrt{c_S(x)^2+v_A(x)^2}$, which is about half the external Alfvén speed for a Harris-type profile; the paper uses the ratio of the sheet length $L$ to this speed to predict a period of $63$–$115$ s, averaging $\approx 89$ s, matching the measured $\approx 91$ s. The Y-points at the sheet ends convert the oscillation and reconnection outflows into the two observed wave modes, so the sheet is simultaneously the oscillator and the wave source.

What would settle it

Re-run the same experiment in a domain at least twice as large, or with explicitly non-reflecting outflow boundaries, and compare the sheet-width, sheet-length, and wave periodicities; if the 91-second signal changes or disappears, boundary reflections were carrying it. A cheaper check is to record the incoming versus outgoing wave amplitude at the boundaries and show the reflected fraction is small, a measurement the paper does not report.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that an impulsively reconnecting current sheet behaves as a natural oscillator and as the source of both fast and slow magnetoacoustic waves. The sequence is: two opposite-polarity flux sources converge at the coronal base, a null collapses into a current sheet, secondary tearing makes the reconnection impulsive and bursty, and the bursts excite surface sausage modes in which the two edges of the sheet move in opposite phase. These sausage modes propagate along the sheet, leak energy sideways in the form of fast-mode radiation, and displace the magnetic Y-points at the sheet's ends, so the sheet length oscillates in anti-phase with its width. The repeated impact of plasma bulges, plasmoids, and reconnection outflows on the Y-points generates arc-shaped fast wavefronts in the ambient corona and periodic high-density patches of slow-mode waves along the separatrices. The measured periods of the width oscillation, the length oscillation, and both wave families agree with each other—about 91 seconds—and with the expected tube-speed period $L/\max(c_T)$ for the sheet.

Load-bearing premise

The 91-second oscillation is called a natural mode on the assumption that the outer numerical boundaries do not reflect waves back into the simulation; the paper states its boundary conditions produce very little reflection but does not quantify this, so a significant reflection would make the periodicity partly numerical.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Short-period quasi-periodic pulsations in flares, on timescales of tens of seconds, can be produced by the natural sausage oscillation of a reconnecting current sheet rather than by an external oscillation source.
  • Large-scale arc-shaped fast-mode wavefronts observed after flares can be traced back to repeated collisions of plasma bulges and plasmoids with the magnetic Y-points, giving the wave period as a diagnostic of the sheet's length and tube speed.
  • Slow-mode disturbances along separatrices and low-lying loops should accompany the fast wavefronts and share the same period, providing an observational fingerprint of a reconnection-driven source.
  • Reconnection can heat the corona indirectly: some of the released magnetic energy is converted into waves that carry energy away from the sheet and dissipate in the surrounding plasma.
  • In three dimensions, current sheets around nulls, separators, and quasi-separators should show the same natural oscillations and act as sources for waves in all directions and along separatrix surfaces.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A testable extension: varying the source separation or the background field should shift the period according to $L/\max(c_T)$; if the measured wavelet periods follow that scaling across runs, the mode interpretation is strengthened, and if they do not, the oscillation is controlled by something else.
  • Boundary-reflection caveat aside, the same setup with asynchronous or multiple-step driving could produce several simultaneous periods, which might explain multi-period quasi-periodic pulsations better than a single 91-second clock.
  • The predicted anti-phase relation between sheet width and length could be searched for in imaging of flaring current sheets: frames showing minimal sheet width should coincide with maximal sheet length.
  • The paired fast-wave/slow-wave emission is a distinctive signature: blast-wave models of coronal waves would not naturally produce slow waves strictly confined to separatrices at the same period, so joint observations could discriminate source mechanisms.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper presents a 2D resistive MHD simulation of the coronal response to converging footpoint motions. A magnetic null collapses into a current sheet, which undergoes impulsive bursty reconnection. The authors report that the sheet's width and length oscillate with a ~91 s period, identify the width oscillation as a leaky surface sausage mode, and show that the oscillating Y-points at the sheet ends generate outward fast magnetoacoustic waves and field-aligned slow waves with the same period. The identification rests on anti-correlated oscillations of the two sheet edges and of the Vx components, wavelet period measurements, and pressure-fluctuation phase relations, together with a comparison with the tube-speed period L/max(c_T).

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper provides a self-consistent mechanism linking impulsive reconnection, natural current-sheet oscillations, and the generation of both fast and slow MHD waves, with direct relevance to quasi-periodic pulsations and coronal heating. Its strengths are the multiplicity of diagnostics—cross-correlations, wavelet significance levels, and mode identification through pressure-phase relations—and the fact that the ~91 s period is an emergent quantity rather than a fitted parameter. The main weakness is that the natural-mode interpretation depends on an unquantified claim that the outer boundaries are essentially non-reflecting.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 4] The claim that the 91 s current-sheet oscillation is a natural sausage mode rests on an unquantified assertion about boundary reflections. Section 4 states that the adopted boundary conditions 'produce very little reflection,' but the top and side boundaries use continuous zero-gradient conditions and the bottom uses fixed pressure/density with antisymmetric V_y, none of which is transparent to fast MHD waves. Since the domain is 160 x 80 Mm and the measured fast speed is 469 ± 22 km/s, a wave can cross the domain in roughly 170 s vertically and 340 s horizontally, so multiple reflected passes are kinematically possible within the 469-1984 s analysis window. Please provide a quantitative reflection test (e.g., a larger-domain run, a sponge-layer run, or a measurement of inward-propagating wave amplitudes at the boundaries); without it, the central causal chain from impulsive reconnection to a natural sausage mode to propagating waves is not fully established.
  2. [Section 3.3.4, Eq. (2)] The theoretical period estimate L/max(c_T) is presented as supporting the natural-mode interpretation, but it is not an independent check: L is the instantaneous simulated current-sheet length and c_T is computed from the simulated fields, and the resulting range (63-115 s, average 89 ± 10 s) brackets the observed 91 s. The broad range means this consistency does not distinguish a true leaky sausage eigenmode from an oscillation forced by reflected waves. A convincing identification would require either the boundary-reflection test above or an explicit comparison with an eigenmode calculation for the simulated background profiles.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Title] The title contains a line-break typo: 'W aves' should read 'Waves'.
  2. [Section 1] The text 'Both these example' should read 'Both these examples'.
  3. [Section 4] The phrase 'important in in coronal heating' contains a duplicated 'in' and should be corrected.
  4. [Figure 5 caption] The caption lists '(xnull − 1) Mm and (xnull − 1) Mm'; the second instance should presumably be '(xnull + 1) Mm'.
  5. [Section 3.3] The current-sheet half-width is only about 0.15-0.2 Mm, or 4-5 grid cells at the stated 39 km resolution; a brief comment on the sensitivity of the W and Vx measurements to this resolution would strengthen the quantitative claims.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the 91 s period is a measured simulation output; the tube-speed comparison is a self-consistent check, and the SWAR self-citation is framing only.

full rationale

The central result—an impulsively reconnecting current sheet undergoing ~91 s sausage oscillations and launching fast and slow magnetoacoustic waves—is an emergent product of the MHD simulation, not a fitted constant or a consequence of the authors' prior work. The period is obtained by wavelet analysis of simulated quantities ((W-W0)/W0, Vx at the sheet edge, and (L-L0)/L0); none of these is adjusted to reproduce the tube-speed formula. The comparison in Section 3.3.4 uses L and max(cT) measured from the same simulation, so it is an internal consistency check rather than an externally parameter-free prediction; however, the dispersion relation itself is independent prior work (Smith et al. 1997; Edwin & Roberts 1982), no parameter is tuned to force agreement, and a mismatch would have been meaningful. The 'Symbiosis of Waves and Reconnection (SWAR)' concept is cited from the authors' own papers for interpretive framing only; the numerical mechanism is fully specified by the MHD equations and boundary driving and does not depend on that concept. The only notable weakness is the unquantified assertion in Section 4 that the boundary conditions 'produce very little reflection'; this is a robustness or correctness concern about possible numerical artifacts, not circularity, because even a reflection-contaminated 91 s signal would be an emergent simulation output rather than a quantity inserted by construction. No uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors, no ansatz is smuggled in via citation, and no known empirical result is merely renamed. The score of 2 reflects only the minor, non-load-bearing self-citation and the internally parameterized theoretical comparison, not any reduction of the central claim to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The simulation parameters (B0=15 G, flux F=3.6e11 G cm, driver speed V0=10 km/s, uniform resistivity, etc.) are fixed from coronal conditions or previous simulations and are not fitted to produce the 91 s period; the period is an emergent output, and the theoretical comparison uses the measured sheet length and local tube speed. No free parameters in the sense of fitted constants are present. The main axioms are the MHD model, 2D geometry, neglect of gravity, the specific boundary conditions, and the application of slab sausage-mode theory to the simulated sheet.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Resistive, viscous, thermally conductive MHD equations (Eqs. 3-6) with uniform resistivity and viscosity
    The simulation solves these equations to model the corona; uniform resistivity of 2.4e8 m2/s and viscosity 0.027 g/cm/s are inputs, not fitted.
  • domain assumption 2D geometry, no gravity or stratification
    Section 2 states gravity is neglected because the coronal scale height is large; this is a modeling simplification stated explicitly.
  • domain assumption Initial potential field from two magnetic fragments plus overlying uniform field (Eq. 9)
    The initial equilibrium with a null point and high-beta region is constructed from Syntelis et al. (2019), not derived in the paper.
  • standard math Surface sausage mode theory for a slab with varying B (Smith et al. 1997), specifically phase speed equal to maximum tube speed cT
    Equation (2) and Section 3.3.4 use this prior theory to predict the oscillation period; the paper applies the theory to a finite-length sheet with Y-points.
  • ad hoc to paper The numerical boundary conditions (continuous on top/sides, fixed bottom) are effectively non-reflecting
    Section 4 claims reflections are ruled out because the boundaries 'produce very little reflection', but no quantitative test is provided; this is load-bearing for identifying the oscillation as natural.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Generation of Surface Sausage Oscillations of a Current Sheet and Propagating Magnetoacoustic Waves by Impulsive Reconnection." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6MZXBS6Q

@misc{pith2026250709932,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Generation of Surface Sausage Oscillations of a Current Sheet and Propagating Magnetoacoustic Waves by Impulsive Reconnection},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6MZXBS6Q}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.09932}
}
read the original abstract

Magnetic reconnection and Magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) waves may well be both playing a role in coronal heating. In this paper, we simulate reconnection in the corona as a response to the convergence of opposite-polarity magnetic sources at the base of the corona. A current sheet forms at a magnetic null and undergoes impulsive bursty reconnection which drives natural modes of oscillation of the current sheet by a process of symbiosis. These are leaky surface sausage modes which cause the length of the current sheet to oscillate. Interaction of the oscillations and reconnection outflows with the magnetic Y-points at the ends of the sheet acts as sources for magnetoacoustic waves. Fast-mode waves propagate outwards into the coronal environment, while slow-mode waves propagate along the separatrices extending from the ends of the current sheet. The periodicities for sausage oscillations of the current sheet, for the current sheet length, and for the propagating large-scale magnetoacoustic waves are all estimated to be approximately 91 s for the parameters of our experiment.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.09932 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Collapse and displacement of the null and the high-β region surrounding it: Panels (a1)-(a10) reveal a gradual collapse of the null to form a current sheet-like structure (see panel (a1)-(a6)) followed by a gradual relaxation at later stages (see panels (a7)-(a10)). Magenta streamlines in panel (a1) depict the magnetic field configuration at t = 0 s. The red circle denotes the initial unperturbed plasma β = 1 contou… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The temporal evolution of Jz and ρ: Panels (a1)-(a5) exhibit the accumulation of current at 240 s, CS and wave-like features at 733 s, 1443 s and 1719 s, and the decay of current at 2224 s. The y-directed red dashed line denotes the time-dependent positions of the slit (denoted as Sf ) within y = [10,70] Mm at x = xmin(B)(t) Mm at time t. ‘P’ denotes the location at which the identification of the arc-shaped wavefro… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Identification of plasmoids: Closed magnetic field lines are overplotted on high-density plasma blobs in density maps of the field of view x = [0, 3.5] Mm and y = [20, 35] Mm, which reveal that plasmoids are formed at five instances, namely, around 661 s, 1371 s, 1563 s, 1647 s and 1743 s. At other times, even though there are high-density plasma bulges or flows that form and propagate, they are not plasmoids, since… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Sausage oscillation of the CS: Panel (a) shows the time-distance diagram in temperature estimated across the CS within x = [−0.5, 3.5] Mm at the instantaneous mid-point of the CS. Lime dashed curves denote the repetitive compression and expansion of the CS width, sugge…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Periodic and symmetric variation of the velocity component normal to the CS axis: Panel (a) shows vari￾ations in the average Vx with time. Averaging is carried out within y(t) = [Ypointbottom(t), Ypointtop(t)] Mm at x = (xmin(B)(t) − 1) Mm and x = (xmin(B)(t) + 1) Mm (…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Characteristics of the Sausage Mode: Propagating and Leaking: Panels (a), (b) and (c) exhibit successive outward propagation of wavy profiles in Vx along the CS in the y-direction as depicted by arrows from 1118 s to 1334 s in the absence of plasmoids, confirming the p…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Oscillatory stretching and contraction of the CS along its axis and its correlation with sausage oscillation: Panel (a) shows the time-variations in the y-locations of the magnetic Y-points at the top and bottom of the CS. These estimates are carried out at x = xmin(B)…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Identification of fast and slow modes and their connection to CS oscillations: Panel (a) exhibits a time-distance diagram in density as estimated using a slit extending from y = 10 Mm to y = 70 Mm at x = xmin(B)(t) Mm (denoted by Sf in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fi…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Visual inspection of the initial configuration at the coronal base and its evolution with time: Panel (a) shows the spatial variation of the y-component of the magnetic field at the bottom boundary at 0 s in dimen￾sionless form. Red and blue dashed lines denote the pos…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Visual inspection of the generation of high-density patches at the bottom Y-point and their propagation along the loops: Running difference maps of density suggest that the bottom Y-point is also perturbed, which further results in the generation of high-density patch…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

100 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  3. [3]

    !1A Qa

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    2021

  4. [4]

    M., & Keppens, R.\ 2022, , 668, A47

    Brughmans, N., Jenkins, J. M., & Keppens, R.\ 2022, , 668, A47. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244071

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244071 2022

  5. [5]

    S.\ 1986, , 103, 277

    Cally, P. S.\ 1986, , 103, 277. doi:10.1007/BF00147830

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00147830 1986

  6. [6]

    B., Wei, X

    Cao, J. B., Wei, X. H., Duan, A. Y., et al.\ 2013, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 118, 1659. doi:10.1002/jgra.50246

    work page doi:10.1002/jgra.50246 2013

  7. [7]

    Cheng, C. Z. & Choe, G. S.\ 1998, , 505, 376. doi:10.1086/306143

    work page doi:10.1086/306143 1998

  8. [8]

    R., Li, H

    Cheng, X., Priest, E. R., Li, H. T., et al.\ 2023, Nature Communications, 14, 2107. doi:10.1038/s41467-023-37888-w

    doi:10.1038/s41467-023-37888-w 2023

Show all 100 references
  1. [9]

    K., Velli, M

    Edmondson, J. K., Velli, M. M., & DeVore, C. R.\ 2010, AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, 2010, SH54C-02

    2010

  2. [10]

    Edwin, P. M. & Roberts, B.\ 1982, , 76, 239. doi:10.1007/BF00170986

    1982 doi

  3. [11]

    M., Roberts, B., & Hughes, W

    Edwin, P. M., Roberts, B., & Hughes, W. J.\ 1986, , 13, 373. doi:10.1029/GL013i004p00373

    1986 doi

  4. [12]

    R., Nistic \`o , G., Nakariakov, V

    Goddard, C. R., Nistic \`o , G., Nakariakov, V. M., et al.\ 2016, , 594, A96. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201628478

    2016 doi

  5. [13]

    P.\ 1971, Physica, 53, 412

    Goedbloed, J. P.\ 1971, Physica, 53, 412. doi:10.1016/0031-8914(71)90127-3

    1971 doi

  6. [14]

    Goedbloed, J. P. H. & Poedts, S.\ 2004, ``Principles of Magnetohydrodynamics, by J.P.H. Goedbloed and S. Poedts. ISBN 0521626072

    2004

  7. [15]

    P., Keppens, R., & Poedts, S.\ 2010, Advanced Magnetohydrodynamics, by J

    Goedbloed, J. P., Keppens, R., & Poedts, S.\ 2010, Advanced Magnetohydrodynamics, by J. P. Goedbloed , Rony Keppens , Stefaan Poedts, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2010

    2010

  8. [16]

    Goossens

    Goossens, M.\ 2003, An introduction to plasma astrophysics and magnetohydrodynamics, by M. Goossens. Astrophysics and Space Science Library, Vol. 294. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-1076-4

    2003 doi

  9. [17]

    doi:10.1016/0021-9991(83)90136-5

    Harten, A.\ 1983, Journal of Computational Physics, 49, 357. doi:10.1016/0021-9991(83)90136-5

    1983 doi

  10. [18]

    M., & Fludra, A.\ 2014, , 567, A24

    Hornsey, C., Nakariakov, V. M., & Fludra, A.\ 2014, , 567, A24. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423524

    2014 doi

  11. [19]

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1993

    Hu, J., Ye, J., Chen, Y., et al.\ 2024, , 962, 42. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad1993

    2024 doi

  12. [20]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201219891

    Jel \' nek, P., Karlick \'y , M., & Murawski, K.\ 2012, , 546, A49. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201219891

    2012 doi

  13. [21]

    Jenkins, J. M. & Keppens, R.\ 2021, , 646, A134. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039630

    2021 doi

  14. [22]

    K., Kolotkov, D

    Kashapova, L. K., Kolotkov, D. Y., Kupriyanova, E. G., et al.\ 2021, , 296, 185. doi:10.1007/s11207-021-01934-x

    2021 doi

  15. [23]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201220296

    Karlick \'y , M., M \'e sz \'a rosov \'a , H., & Jel \' nek, P.\ 2013, , 550, A1. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201220296

    2013 doi

  16. [24]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629652

    Karlick \'y , M.\ 2017, , 602, A122. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201629652

    2017 doi

  17. [25]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245359

    Keppens, R., Popescu Braileanu, B., Zhou, Y., et al.\ 2023, , 673, A66. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245359

    2023 doi

  18. [26]

    A., Botha, G

    Karampelas, K., McLaughlin, J. A., Botha, G. J. J., et al.\ 2023, , 943, 131. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acac90

    2023 doi

  19. [27]

    doi:10.1063/1.871559

    Klapper, I., Rado, A., & Tabor, M.\ 1996, Physics of Plasmas, 3, 4281. doi:10.1063/1.871559

    1996 doi

  20. [28]

    O.\ 2000, , 360, 715

    Kliem, B., Karlick \'y , M., & Benz, A. O.\ 2000, , 360, 715. doi:10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/0006324

    2000 doi arXiv

  21. [29]

    S., & T \"o r \"o k, T.\ 2004, , 413, L23

    Kliem, B., Titov, V. S., & T \"o r \"o k, T.\ 2004, , 413, L23. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20031690

    2004 doi

  22. [30]

    M., & Cho, K.-S.\ 2017, , 844, 149

    Kumar, P., Nakariakov, V. M., & Cho, K.-S.\ 2017, , 844, 149. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7d53

    2017 doi

  23. [31]

    C., Wang, S., Wei, C

    Lee, L. C., Wang, S., Wei, C. Q., et al.\ 1988, , 93, 7354. doi:10.1029/JA093iA07p07354

    1988 doi

  24. [32]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245765

    Liakh, V., Luna, M., & Khomenko, E.\ 2023, , 673, A154. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245765

    2023 doi

  25. [33]

    & Keppens, R.\ 2025, , 696, A158

    Liakh, V. & Keppens, R.\ 2025, , 696, A158. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202453300

    2025 doi

  26. [34]

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaf167

    Li, L., Zhang, J., Peter, H., et al.\ 2018, , 868, L33. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaf167

    2018 doi

  27. [35]

    Linnell Nemec, A. F. & Nemec, J. M.\ 1985, , 90, 2317. doi:10.1086/113936

    1985 doi

  28. [36]

    M., Zhao, J., et al.\ 2011, , 736, L13

    Liu, W., Title, A. M., Zhao, J., et al.\ 2011, , 736, L13. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/736/1/L13

    2011 doi

  29. [37]

    V., et al.\ 2012, , 753, 52

    Liu, W., Ofman, L., Nitta, N. V., et al.\ 2012, , 753, 52. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/753/1/52

    2012 doi

  30. [38]

    Longcope, D. W. & Priest, E. R.\ 2007, Physics of Plasmas, 14, 122905. doi:10.1063/1.2823023

    2007 doi

  31. [39]

    F., Schekochihin, A

    Loureiro, N. F., Schekochihin, A. A., & Cowley, S. C.\ 2007, Physics of Plasmas, Instability of current sheets and formation of plasmoid chains, 14, 10, 100703. doi:10.1063/1.2783986

    2007 doi

  32. [40]

    C.\ 1987, , 323, 358

    Low, B. C.\ 1987, , 323, 358. doi:10.1086/165833

    1987 doi

  33. [41]

    A., Verth, G., Fedun, V., et al.\ 2012, , 749, 30

    McLaughlin, J. A., Verth, G., Fedun, V., et al.\ 2012, , 749, 30. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/749/1/30

    2012 doi

  34. [42]

    A., Nakariakov, V

    McLaughlin, J. A., Nakariakov, V. M., Dominique, M., et al.\ 2018, , 214, 45. doi:10.1007/s11214-018-0478-5

    2018 doi

  35. [43]

    S., & Priest, E

    Mellor, C., Titov, V. S., & Priest, E. R.\ 2003, Geophysical and Astrophysical Fluid Dynamics, 97, 489. doi:10.1080/0309192032000141483

    2003 doi

  36. [44]

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/44

    M \'e sz \'a rosov \'a , H., Karlick \'y , M., Jel \' nek, P., et al.\ 2014, , 788, 44. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/788/1/44

    2014 doi

  37. [45]

    K., Mishra, S

    Mondal, S., Srivastava, A. K., Mishra, S. K., et al.\ 2023, , 953, 84. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acd2da

    2023 doi

  38. [46]

    K., Pontin, D

    Mondal, S., Srivastava, A. K., Pontin, D. I., Ding Yuan & Priest, E.R.\ 2024, , 963, 139. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad2079

    2024 doi

  39. [47]

    K., Pontin, D

    Mondal, S., Srivastava, A. K., Pontin, D. I., et al.\ 2024, , 977, 235. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad9022

    2024 doi

  40. [48]

    Nakariakov, V. M. & Roberts, B.\ 1995, , 159, 399. doi:10.1007/BF00686541

    1995 doi

  41. [49]

    M., Ofman, L., Deluca, E

    Nakariakov, V. M., Ofman, L., Deluca, E. E., et al.\ 1999, Science, 285, 862. doi:10.1126/science.285.5429.862

    1999 doi

  42. [50]

    Nakariakov, V. M. & Verwichte, E.\ 2005, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 2, 3. doi:10.12942/lrsp-2005-3

    2005 doi

  43. [51]

    M., Foullon, C., Verwichte, E., et al.\ 2006, , 452, 343

    Nakariakov, V. M., Foullon, C., Verwichte, E., et al.\ 2006, , 452, 343. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20054608

    2006 doi

  44. [52]

    Nakariakov, V. M. & Melnikov, V. F.\ 2009, , 149, 119. doi:10.1007/s11214-009-9536-3

    2009 doi

  45. [53]

    Nakariakov, V. M. & Zimovets, I. V.\ 2011, , 730, L27. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/730/2/L27

    2011 doi

  46. [54]

    M., Hornsey, C., & Melnikov, V

    Nakariakov, V. M., Hornsey, C., & Melnikov, V. F.\ 2012, , 761, 134. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/761/2/134

    2012 doi

  47. [55]

    J., & Nakariakov, V

    Nistic \`o , G., Pascoe, D. J., & Nakariakov, V. M.\ 2014, , 569, A12. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201423763

    2014 doi

  48. [56]

    V., Schrijver, C

    Nitta, N. V., Schrijver, C. J., Title, A. M., et al.\ 2013, , 776, 58. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/776/1/58

    2013 doi

  49. [57]

    H., N \'o brega-Siverio, D., & Carlsson, M.\ 2023, , 675, A97

    F rder, . H., N \'o brega-Siverio, D., & Carlsson, M.\ 2023, , 675, A97. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202346447

    2023 doi

  50. [58]

    G., et al.\ 2001, , 368, 1095

    O'Shea, E., Banerjee, D., Doyle, J. G., et al.\ 2001, , 368, 1095. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20010073

    2001 doi

  51. [59]

    J., Nakariakov, V

    Pascoe, D. J., Nakariakov, V. M., & Arber, T. D.\ 2007, , 461, 1149. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20065986

    2007 doi

  52. [60]

    Pontin, D. I. & Priest, E. R.\ 2022, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 19, 1. doi:10.1007/s41116-022-00032-9

    2022 doi

  53. [61]

    I., Priest, E

    Pontin, D. I., Priest, E. R., Chitta, L. P., et al.\ 2024, , 960, 51. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad03eb

    2024 doi

  54. [62]

    R.\ 1986, Mitteilungen der Astronomischen Gesellschaft Hamburg, Magnetic Reconnection on the Sun, 65, 41

    Priest, E. R.\ 1986, Mitteilungen der Astronomischen Gesellschaft Hamburg, Magnetic Reconnection on the Sun, 65, 41

    1986

  55. [63]

    S., & Khomenko, E.\ 2023, , 670, A31

    Popescu Braileanu, B., Lukin, V. S., & Khomenko, E.\ 2023, , 670, A31. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202142996

    2023 doi

  56. [64]

    doi:10.1017/CBO9781139020732

    Priest, E.\ 2014, Magnetohydrodynamics of the Sun, by Eric Priest, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2014. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139020732

    2014 doi

  57. [65]

    Priest, E. R. & Syntelis, P.\ 2021, , 647, A31. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038917

    2021 doi

  58. [66]

    Priest, E. R. & Pontin, D. I.\ 2024, , 534, 3133. doi:10.1093/mnras/stae2294

    2024 doi

  59. [67]

    M., & Benz, A

    Roberts, B., Edwin, P. M., & Benz, A. O.\ 1984, , 279, 857. doi:10.1086/161956

    1984 doi

  60. [68]

    Roberts, B.\ 2019, MHD Waves in the Solar Atmosphere, by Bernard Roberts, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2019

    2019

  61. [69]

    Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

    Roberts, B.\ 2019, MHD waves in the solar atmosphere, by Roberts, Bernard, 2019. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 1-108-63358-7

    2019

  62. [70]

    doi:10.1007/s11207-019-1428-4

    Rudawy, P., Radziszewski, K., Berlicki, A., et al.\ 2019, , 294, 48. doi:10.1007/s11207-019-1428-4

    2019 doi

  63. [71]

    B., Longcope, D

    Scott, R. B., Longcope, D. W., & McKenzie, D. E.\ 2013, , 776, 54. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/776/1/54

    2013 doi

  64. [72]

    & Keppens, R.\ 2022, , 666, A28

    Sen, S. & Keppens, R.\ 2022, , 666, A28. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244152

    2022 doi

  65. [73]

    & Liu, Y.\ 2012, , 753, 53

    Shen, Y. & Liu, Y.\ 2012, , 753, 53. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/753/1/53

    2012 doi

  66. [74]

    doi:10.1007/s11207-013-0395-4

    Shen, Y.-D., Liu, Y., Su, J.-T., et al.\ 2013, , 288, 585. doi:10.1007/s11207-013-0395-4

    2013 doi

  67. [75]

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/

    Shen, Y., Liu, Y., Song, T., et al.\ 2018, , 853, 1. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/

    2018 doi

  68. [76]

    D., et al.\ 2018, , 861, 105

    Shen, Y., Liu, Y., Liu, Y. D., et al.\ 2018, , 861, 105. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aac9be

    2018 doi

  69. [77]

    M., Roberts, B., & Oliver, R.\ 1997, , 327, 377

    Smith, J. M., Roberts, B., & Oliver, R.\ 1997, , 327, 377

    1997

  70. [78]

    N., Anusha, L

    Smitha, H. N., Anusha, L. S., Solanki, S. K., et al.\ 2017, , 229, 17. doi:10.3847/1538-4365/229/1/17

    2017 doi

  71. [79]

    K., Zaqarashvili, T

    Srivastava, A. K., Zaqarashvili, T. V., Uddin, W., et al.\ 2008, , 388, 1899. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13532.x

    2008

  72. [80]

    K., Priest, E

    Srivastava, A. K., Priest, E. R., Ofman, L., Mondal, Sripan, Kwon, R.-Y., Pontin, D., Murawski, K., Mishra, S. K., Yuan, Ding, Asai, A., 2024, COSPAR 44th Scientific Assembly, Busan, S. Korea, E2.7-0002-24

    2024

  73. [82]

    K., Mondal, S., Priest, E

    Srivastava, A. K., Mondal, S., Priest, E. R., et al.\ 2025, , Localized Heating and Dynamics of the Solar Corona due to a Symbiosis of Waves and Reconnection, 984, 1, 36. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adc379

    2025 doi

  74. [83]

    T., Shen, Y

    Su, J. T., Shen, Y. D., Liu, Y., et al.\ 2012, , 755, 113. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/755/2/113

    2012 doi

  75. [84]

    R., & Chitta, L

    Syntelis, P., Priest, E. R., & Chitta, L. P.\ 2019, , 872, 32. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aafaf8

    2019 doi

  76. [85]

    & Priest, E

    Syntelis, P. & Priest, E. R.\ 2021, , 649, A101. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140474

    2021 doi

  77. [86]

    & Shibata, K.\ 2016, , 823, 150

    Takasao, S. & Shibata, K.\ 2016, , 823, 150. doi:10.3847/0004-637X/823/2/150

    2016 doi

  78. [87]

    Tarr, L. A. & Linton, M.\ 2019, , 879, 127. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab27c5

    2019 doi

  79. [88]

    O., Pontin, D

    Thurgood, J. O., Pontin, D. I., & McLaughlin, J. A.\ 2018, , 855, 50. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aab0a0

    2018 doi

  80. [89]

    H., et al.\ 2003, , 586, 1, 579

    van Driel-Gesztelyi, L., D \'e moulin, P., Mandrini, C. H., et al.\ 2003, , 586, 1, 579. doi:10.1086/367633

    2003 doi

  81. [90]

    doi:10.1016/0021-9991(79)90145-1

    van Leer, B.\ 1979, Journal of Computational Physics, 32, 101. doi:10.1016/0021-9991(79)90145-1

    1979 doi

  82. [91]

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac8b79

    Wang, J., Yan, X., Xue, Z., et al.\ 2022, , 936, L12. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac8b79

    2022 doi

  83. [92]

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab1135

    Xue, Z., Yan, X., Jin, C., et al.\ 2019, , 874, L27. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab1135

    2019 doi

  84. [93]

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/800/2/111

    Yang, L., Zhang, L., He, J., et al.\ 2015, , 800, 111. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/800/2/111

    2015 doi

  85. [94]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321435

    Yuan, D., Shen, Y., Liu, Y., et al.\ 2013, , 554, A144. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321435

    2013 doi

  86. [95]

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525621

    Zhang, Y., Zhang, J., Wang, J., et al.\ 2015, , 581, A78. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201525621

    2015 doi

  87. [96]

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7142

    Zhao, X., Xia, C., Keppens, R., et al.\ 2017, , 841, 106. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7142

    2017 doi

  88. [97]

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab863c

    Zheng, R., Chen, Y., Wang, B., et al.\ 2020, , 894, 139. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab863c

    2020 doi

  89. [98]

    & Keppens, R.\ 2022, , 928, 45

    Zhao, X. & Keppens, R.\ 2022, , 928, 45. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac54a4

    2022 doi

  90. [99]

    doi:10.1007/s11207-021-01913-2

    Zhou, X., Shen, Y., Su, J., et al.\ 2021, , 296, 169. doi:10.1007/s11207-021-01913-2

    2021 doi

  91. [100]

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad7a68

    Zhou, X., Tang, Z., Qu, Z., et al.\ 2024, , 974, L3. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad7a68

    2024 doi

  92. [101]

    Zweibel, E. G. & Yamada, M.\ 2009, , 47, 291. doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101726

    2009 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.