Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 70 references

Co-existence of longitudinal and transverse oscillations in polar plumes observed with Solar Orbiter/EUI

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The same polar plumes carry slow magneto-acoustic and Alfvénic waves together, and Solar Orbiter's EUI imager can see both in one dataset.

desk verdict Plausible EUI observation of both wave modes in polar plumes, but the longitudinal-wave claim rests on a wave-vs-outflow interpretation that the paper does not close off. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.07796 v1 pith:QX4Y5BNK submitted 2025-09-09 astro-ph.SR

Upasna Baweja , Vaibhav Pant , S. Krishna Prasad , Arpit Kumar Shrivastav , Tom Van Doorsselaere , Nancy Narang , Cis Verbeeck , M. Saleem Khan
show 1 more author
David Berghmans
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SR
keywords MHDwavespolarplumesslowmagneto-acousticAlfvénicSolarOrbiterEUIcoronalholestime-distancemaps
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 sets out to show that polar coronal plumes contain two different MHD wave families at the same place and time: slow magneto-acoustic waves, which compress the plasma as they move outward, and transverse Alfvénic oscillations, which sway the plume as a whole. The authors use Solar Orbiter's EUI imager with 210 km pixels and 5 s cadence to watch five plumes for about 19 minutes each. They find slanted bright-dark ridges in time-distance maps consistent with outward compressive waves, and separately find 98 transverse oscillations by tracking plume substructures across time. These two modes occur in the same plumes up to 20 Mm above the limb, so one EUV instrument can simultaneously measure both energy channels thought to feed coronal heating and solar wind.

What carries the argument

Time-distance maps are the central instrument: vertical slits convert the image sequence into maps where slanted bright and dark ridges trace outward-propagating compressive disturbances, and fitting Gaussian profiles along those ridges yields projected speeds. Transverse oscillations are extracted from contiguous horizontal slits by fitting a Gaussian across each plume substructure at every time step and then fitting the tracked centres with a sinusoid plus linear trend. The density diagnostic assumes kink-mode propagation and conserved wave energy flux, giving v proportional to rho^{-1/4}, which converts the measured velocity amplitudes into a relative electron-density profile with height.

What would settle it

Take simultaneous Doppler-velocity time-distance maps of the same plumes: if the 9-minute bright-dark ridge pattern appears with sinusoidal line-of-sight velocity oscillations at the same period, the slow-wave interpretation is confirmed; if the ridges correspond to non-oscillatory outflows with no periodic velocity signature, the longitudinal half of the coexistence claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is the simultaneous, co-spatial presence of slow magneto-acoustic and Alfvénic waves in polar plumes, detected with a single instrument rather than by combining different telescopes. Ridge slopes in intensity time-distance maps give projected speeds of 115-125 km/s, amplitudes of 1.4-3.2% of background, and damping lengths of roughly 2.4-7.1 Mm, with a dominant period near 9.4 min in two plumes; the temperature implied by the sound speed is 0.58-0.69 MK. Gaussian and sinusoidal fits to transverse displacements in the same plumes yield log-normal means of 165±82 km displacement, 93±39 s period, and 12±7 km/s velocity amplitude, with displacement and velocity amplitudes incre

Load-bearing premise

The slanted ridges in the time-distance maps are taken to be slow magneto-acoustic waves; the paper itself notes that such propagating disturbances are often attributed to plasma outflows from jets or spicules, and no Doppler or multi-wavelength measurement is offered to rule that out.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single EUI dataset can be used to study the energetics of both compressive and transverse wave modes in polar coronal holes, avoiding the plate-scale and cadence mismatches of combining different instruments.
  • Compressive propagating disturbances are detectable not only in whole plumes but also in the fine-scale substructures inside them, indicating wave or flow organization at sub-plume scales.
  • The measured transverse amplitude and velocity growth with height supports wave amplification in expanding plume geometry, though a larger sample is needed.
  • The wave-derived plume temperatures of 0.58-0.69 MK provide a lower-limit temperature diagnostic based on the projected sound speed.
  • The shorter damping lengths measured here compared with earlier AIA measurements are left as an open question, suggesting either stronger dissipation or an instrument-resolution effect.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the slow-wave identification is correct, the same data pipeline could be applied to inter-plume lanes, where longer-period compressive signatures have been reported, to see whether two-mode coexistence is a general property of open coronal structures.
  • A simultaneous Doppler-velocity observation of the same plumes would settle whether the time-distance ridges are true slow waves or quasi-periodic outflows, a distinction imaging alone cannot make.
  • Longer EUI campaigns could separate the 9.4 min signal from low-frequency leakage and test whether the unusually short damping lengths persist or are an artefact of the 19-minute window.
  • The relative density profile inferred from transverse velocity amplitudes could be compared with density profiles from multi-wavelength EUV diagnostics, providing a direct cross-check of the energy-flux assumption.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. Using Solar Orbiter/EUI HRI_EUV 174 Å imaging from 14 September 2021, the paper reports the simultaneous presence of longitudinal ('slow magneto-acoustic') and transverse ('Alfvénic') oscillations in five polar plumes up to about 20 Mm. Longitudinal disturbances are identified as inclined bright/dark ridges in time–distance maps, with projected speeds of 115–125 km/s, relative amplitudes of 1.4–3.2%, damping lengths of about 2.4–7.1 Mm, and a 9.4-min periodicity reported for two of the five plumes; similar ridges are also seen in fine-scale substructures. Transverse oscillations are measured by manually fitting 98 Gaussian-determined centroid series, yielding log-normal mean displacement amplitude, period, and velocity amplitude. The paper concludes that this is the first co-spatial, co-temporal detection of both wave modes in the same polar plumes with Solar Orbiter/EUI.

Significance. If the longitudinal component is correctly identified as a slow magneto-acoustic wave, the result is a valuable observational advance: it demonstrates that a single high-resolution, high-cadence EUI dataset can capture both compressive and transverse MHD wave modes in the same coronal structures, with implications for wave heating and solar-wind acceleration. The paper also reports new detections in fine-scale plume substructures, which have not been emphasized before. Strengths include the use of state-of-the-art EUI data, manual fitting with propagated uncertainties, transparent descriptions of the fitting procedures, and publicly available data products. However, the significance of the central claim is conditional: the longitudinal-wave interpretation is not uniquely supported by the presented intensity imaging alone, given the well-known outflow alternative that the paper itself cites. The quantitative wave parameters (period, damping length, temperature) therefore also carry systematic uncertainties that are not fully reflected in the abstract and conclusions.

major comments (3)
  1. The identification of the inclined bright/dark ridges as slow magneto-acoustic waves is the load-bearing step for the coexistence claim. All reported supporting quantities—ridge slope (projected speed 115–125 km/s), intensity amplitude decay, and 9.4-min periodicity (in 2 of 5 slits)—are equally consistent with quasi-periodic plasma outflows or transient density-enhanced features. The Introduction (§1) itself notes that such disturbances 'are generally attributed to the outflows triggered by small-scale reconnection events, such as jets or spicules' (Pant et al. 2015; Jiao et al. 2015), and Appendix A identifies base brightenings and plasma ejections in the same slits. No Doppler, multi-temperature, or spectroscopic diagnostic is presented to rule out the outflow interpretation. Please provide such a test (e.g., simultaneous SPICE/EIS/CoMP velocities or a line-of-sight intensity-velocity
  2. [Abstract; §3.1.1(iii), Table 1] The abstract's 'periodicities of 9 min' is not supported for the full sample. Only Slits 1 and 3 show a 9.4-min peak; for Slits 2, 4, and 5 the dominant Fourier peak is at 18.8 min, equal to the total observing time, and the text concedes that these periods 'may be less reliable due to the short duration.' Because a periodicity is one of the few wave-like signatures that could distinguish an oscillation from a single outflow event, the absence of a detected period in 3/5 plumes should be stated in the abstract and Table 1 should mark these entries as non-detections rather than leaving the period column blank.
  3. [§3.1.1(ii)] The damping lengths in Table 1 are derived from Gaussian fits to the amplitude decay. However, for three of the five plumes the dominant period is longer than the 19-min observation window, so the fitted decay corresponds to less than one oscillation cycle. In this regime a Gaussian/exponential decay fit is essentially fitting the envelope of a single fading feature, not a wave damping length; the statement in §3.1.1(ii) that the Gaussian form is preferred for periodicities ≥ 20 min does not rescue this, since those periods are not actually measured. The values L_d = 2.45–7.16 Mm should be presented as amplitude-decay scale lengths, not wave damping lengths, unless a period is known.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract; §3.2.3; §4 item 8] The log-normal means for displacement amplitude and period are inconsistent between §3.2.3 (165±82 km, 93±39 s) and Section 4 item 8 (174±91 km, 88±31 s). Please reconcile these values.
  2. [§3.1.1(iv)] The electron temperatures are acknowledged to be lower limits due to projection, but Table 1 reports only the small formal uncertainties propagated from the speed fits. Please quantify or explicitly state the systematic projection uncertainty.
  3. [§3.2.4, Fig. 6] The density power-law fit is written as ne(r)/ne,o = 63.06 h^-1.83, mixing r and h; please define the height variable and its units (Mm) and specify the normalization height clearly. Also describe whether the error bars are standard errors or scatter.
  4. [Fig. 2] The fitted ridges are indicated by cyan lines, but in several panels the ridges are faint; annotations or zoomed insets would help the reader verify the ridge selection and the discontinuities noted for Slit 4.
  5. [§1] The phrase 'Alfvénic waves' is used throughout; 'Alfvénic' should be 'Alfvénic' in the abstract and text. This is a typographical issue only.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's wave parameters are direct measurements, and its temperature/density diagnostics use standard external relations rather than fitting the target claim.

full rationale

The paper contains no derivation step in which a prediction reduces by construction to its inputs. The slow-mode parameters are measured directly: ridge slopes give projected speeds (Section 3.1.1(i)), the amplitude and damping lengths come from Gaussian/exponential fits to the observed spatial amplitude profiles (Section 3.1.1(ii)), and the periods are taken from Fourier peaks of the time-distance maps (Section 3.1.1(iii)). The electron temperature is obtained from the standard relation c_s = 151 sqrt(T) after assuming the measured projected speed is the sound speed (Section 3.1.1(iv)); this is a diagnostic conversion under an explicit assumption, not a fitted input renamed as a prediction, and the paper itself labels the temperature a lower limit. The Alfvénic parameters follow from Gaussian center fitting plus sinusoidal fits (Section 3.2.1) and the density profile uses the external scaling v ∝ ρ^{-1/4} (Moran 2001; Weberg et al. 2020), not a model fitted to its own output. The self-citations (Shrivastav et al. 2024b, 2025; Krishna Prasad et al. 2012, 2019) are methodological references for fitting procedures, not load-bearing uniqueness theorems, and no ansatz is smuggled in via citation. The paper's own introduction notes that propagating disturbances in plumes are often attributed to outflows (Section 1, citing Pant et al. 2015 and Jiao et al. 2015), and the absence of Doppler/multi-wavelength data leaves the wave-versus-outflow interpretation open; however, that is an interpretive ambiguity and correctness risk, not a circular reduction. The central coexistence claim rests on independent detections of two wave signatures in the same structures, and no fitted constant is used to force that conclusion.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The coexistence claim rests on interpreting observed intensity and position variations as two MHD wave modes. The key borrowed assumptions are the outflow-versus-wave interpretation, the sound-speed temperature conversion, constant-BA energy-flux conservation for the density diagnostic, and static Gaussian cross-sections for transverse fitting. There are two fitted density power-law constants.

free parameters (2)
  • Density power-law coefficient = 63.06
    Least-squares fit to the electron densities derived from transverse wave velocity amplitudes using v proportional to n_e^-1/4 (Section 3.2.4). It is fitted to the same data, not independently constrained.
  • Density power-law exponent = -1.83
    Least-squares exponent of h in the density profile fit n_e/n_e,o = 63.06 h^-1.83 (Section 3.2.4, Figure 6).
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The bright/dark ridges in time-distance maps are propagating compressive (slow magneto-acoustic) waves, not plasma outflows or unrelated intensity variations.
    Section 3.1.1; Section 1 cites the alternative outflow interpretation (Pant et al. 2015; Jiao et al. 2015). The paper has no Doppler measurement to exclude flows.
  • domain assumption Transverse oscillation of the Gaussian-fitted intensity peak tracks kink-mode displacement of the plume.
    Section 3.2.1; assumes a stable Gaussian cross-section and that apparent lateral motion is the true wave displacement.
  • domain assumption Energy flux of the waves is conserved and BA (magnetic field times area) is constant with height, giving v proportional to n_e^-1/4.
    Section 3.2.4, using Moran (2001) and Weberg et al. (2020); explicitly stated to hold only for dissipationless plasma.
  • domain assumption Projected propagation speed equals the local sound speed (up to projection factor), allowing temperature T = (c_s/151)^2 MK.
    Section 3.1.1(iv); the authors state the result is a lower limit because of projection.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Co-existence of longitudinal and transverse oscillations in polar plumes observed with Solar Orbiter/EUI." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QX4Y5BNK

@misc{pith2026250907796,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Co-existence of longitudinal and transverse oscillations in polar plumes observed with Solar Orbiter/EUI},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QX4Y5BNK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.07796}
}
abstract

Magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) waves play a key role in heating the solar corona and driving the solar wind. Recent observations have shown the presence of slow magneto-acoustic and Alfv\'enic waves in polar plumes and inter-plumes. However, a complete understanding of wave dynamics in the polar regions has long been limited by the lack of simultaneous, high-resolution observations. In this study, we utilize high spatial (210 km per pixel) and high cadence (5s) dataset from the Extreme Ultraviolet Imager (EUI) aboard Solar Orbiter, acquired on 14 September 2021. Our findings reveal the simultaneous presence of slow magneto-acoustic and Alfv\'enic waves within the same polar plumes. For slow magneto-acoustic waves, the amplitudes of propagating disturbances are 1.4 to 3.2$\%$ of background intensity, with periodicities of 9 min, and the projected speed of these disturbances ranges between 115 to 125 kms$^{-1}$. The corresponding electron temperature in plumes ranges between 0.58 and 0.69 MK. The damping length of these propagating disturbances for five plumes is $\approx$2.4 to 7.1 Mm. The propagating disturbances are also detected in the fine-scale substructures within the plumes. Alfv\'enic waves, on the other hand, are detected with average displacement amplitude, periodicity, and velocity amplitudes of 165$\pm$82 km, 93$\pm$39 s, and 12$\pm$7 kms$^{-1}$ respectively. The ranges for displacement amplitude, period, and velocity amplitude are 50-600 km, 50-250 s, and 3-32 kms$^{-1}$ respectively. These results mark the first demonstration of Solar Orbiter/EUI's ability to simultaneously detect both slow magneto-acoustic and Alfv\'enic wave modes extending up to 20 Mm in polar plumes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.07796 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Selected plumes: Panel [A] and [B] represent Dataset 1 and Dataset 2, respectively, as seen by HRIEUV on Solar Orbiter. White rectangles represent the artificial slits on the plumes selected for the analysis, following intensity contours. The indigo-colored rectangles are transverse slits at different heights, where T00 and T20 are the first and 20th transverse slits at heights ≈3 and 24 Mm above the photospheric li… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Propagating Disturbances: Panels [A]- [E] show the extracted time-distance (TD) maps for the selected plumes. Slit numbers are mentioned at the top of each TD map. The cyan lines are fitted on the ridges depicting the speed of the propagating disturbances in the slits. Panels [F] and [G] represent the TD maps and the fitted ridges of the two fine-scale substructures (SS 1 and SS 2) corresponding to Slit 1. Panels [H… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Damping lengths and periodicity: Panels [A]- [E] show the relative amplitudes of the selected plumes as a function of the distance along the slits. Slit numbers are mentioned at the top of each profile. The grey error bars represent the associated uncertainties. The green stars and magenta plus sign represent the Gaussian and exponential fits to the decaying spatial profiles. Panels [F]-[J] represent the average Fou… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: [A] The time-distance map for the transverse slit at h = 8.4 Mm in Slit 4. Dotted magenta curves correspond to the detected transverse waves fitted as mentioned in Section 3.2. [B]-[E] Zoomed view of the visually detected transverse waves. The error bars represent the …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Panels [A] to [C] represent the box and whisker plot of the wave parameters obtained from all the selected plumes at different heights. Each box’s upper and lower bounds correspond to the third and first data quartiles. The horizontal lines indicate the median values. …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Relative variation in electron density with height obtained from observations in coronal plumes. Data has been normalized by their value at ≈12 Mm. The red dashed line corresponds to the polynomial fit. conditions in numerical simulations by Magyar & Van Doorsselaere (…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: TD maps of the fine-scale substructures in Slits 2,3,4. Slit numbers are mentioned at the top of each TD map. The cyan line depicts the speed of the propagating disturbances. De Pontieu, B., McIntosh, S. W., Carlsson, M., et al. 2007, Science, 318, 1574, doi: 10.1126/s…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

70 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    1999, ApJ, 520, 880, doi: 10.1086/307502

    Alexander, D. 1999, ApJ, 520, 880, doi: 10.1086/307502

    doi:10.1086/307502 1999

  2. [2]

    2007, SoPh, 246, 3, doi: 10.1007/s11207-007-9029-z

    Banerjee, D., Erd´ elyi, R., Oliver, R., & O’Shea, E. 2007, SoPh, 246, 3, doi: 10.1007/s11207-007-9029-z

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-007-9029-z 2007

  3. [3]

    Banerjee, D., O’Shea, E., & Doyle, J. G. 2000, SoPh, 196, 63, doi: 10.1023/A:1005265230456

    work page doi:10.1023/a:1005265230456 2000

  4. [4]

    G., & Goossens, M

    Banerjee, D., O’Shea, E., Doyle, J. G., & Goossens, M. 2001, A&A, 377, 691, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20011153

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20011153 2001

  5. [5]

    Banerjee, D., P´ erez-Su´ arez, D., & Doyle, J. G. 2009, A&A, 501, L15, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200912242

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200912242 2009

  6. [6]

    G., & Wilhelm, K

    Banerjee, D., Teriaca, L., Doyle, J. G., & Wilhelm, K. 1998, A&A, 339, 208

    work page 1998

  7. [7]

    2021, SSRv, 217, 76, doi: 10.1007/s11214-021-00849-0

    Banerjee, D., Krishna Prasad, S., Pant, V., et al. 2021, SSRv, 217, 76, doi: 10.1007/s11214-021-00849-0

    doi:10.1007/s11214-021-00849-0 2021

  8. [8]

    2012, ApJ, 751, 110, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/751/2/110

    Bemporad, A., & Abbo, L. 2012, ApJ, 751, 110, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/751/2/110

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/751/2/110 2012

Show all 70 references
  1. [9]

    Zhugzhda, Y. D. 2011, ApJ, 728, 84, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/728/2/84

    2011 doi

  2. [10]

    Calabro, B., McAteer, R. T. J., & Bloomfield, D. S. 2013, SoPh, 286, 405, doi: 10.1007/s11207-013-0283-y

    2013 doi

  3. [11]

    P., Huang, Z., D’Amicis, R., et al

    Chitta, L. P., Huang, Z., D’Amicis, R., et al. 2025, A&A, 694, A71, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202452737

    2025 doi

  4. [12]

    H., Bely-Dubau, F., et al

    David, C., Gabriel, A. H., Bely-Dubau, F., et al. 1998, A&A, 336, L90 De Pontieu, B., Erd´ elyi, R., & De Moortel, I. 2005, ApJL, 624, L61, doi: 10.1086/430345 De Pontieu, B., & McIntosh, S. W. 2010, ApJ, 722, 1013, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/722/2/1013 15 Figure 7.TD maps of the ...

    1998 doi

  5. [13]

    E., & Gurman, J

    DeForest, C. E., & Gurman, J. B. 1998, ApJL, 501, L217, doi: 10.1086/311460

    1998 doi

  6. [14]

    E., Hoeksema, J

    DeForest, C. E., Hoeksema, J. T., Gurman, J. B., et al. 1997, SoPh, 175, 393, doi: 10.1023/A:1004955223306

    1997 doi

  7. [15]

    E., Lamy, P

    DeForest, C. E., Lamy, P. L., & Llebaria, A. 2001, ApJ, 560, 490, doi: 10.1086/322497 Del Zanna, G., & Bromage, B. J. I. 1999, J. Geophys. Res., 104, 9753, doi: 10.1029/1998JA900067 Del Zanna, G., Bromage, B. J. I., & Mason, H. E. 2003, A&A, 398, 743, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20...

    2001 doi

  8. [16]

    Domingo, V., Fleck, B., & Poland, A. I. 1995, SoPh, 162, 1, doi: 10.1007/BF00733425

    1995 doi

  9. [17]

    G., Banerjee, D., & Perez, M

    Doyle, J. G., Banerjee, D., & Perez, M. E. 1998, SoPh, 181, 91, doi: 10.1023/A:1005019931323

    1998 doi

  10. [18]

    R., Schad, T

    Fehlmann, A., Kuhn, J. R., Schad, T. A., et al. 2023, SoPh, 298, 5, doi: 10.1007/s11207-022-02098-y

    2023 doi

  11. [19]

    L., & Handy, B

    Freeland, S. L., & Handy, B. N. 1998, SoPh, 182, 497, doi: 10.1023/A:1005038224881

    1998 doi

  12. [20]

    2024, A&A, 689, A195, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450769

    Karampelas, K. 2024, A&A, 689, A195, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450769

    2024 doi

  13. [21]

    Hahn, M., Landi, E., & Savin, D. W. 2012, ApJ, 753, 36, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/753/1/36

    2012 doi

  14. [22]

    N., Bruner, M

    Handy, B. N., Bruner, M. E., Tarbell, T. D., et al. 1998, SoPh, 183, 29, doi: 10.1023/A:1005079622620

    1998 doi

  15. [23]

    2015, ApJL, 809, L17, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/809/1/L17

    Jiao, F., Xia, L., Li, B., et al. 2015, ApJL, 809, L17, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/809/1/L17

    2015 doi

  16. [24]

    L., Esser, R., Gardner, L

    Kohl, J. L., Esser, R., Gardner, L. D., et al. 1995, SoPh, 162, 313, doi: 10.1007/BF00733433 Krishna Prasad, S., Banerjee, D., & Gupta, G. R. 2011, A&A, 528, L4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201016405 Krishna Prasad, S., Banerjee, D., & Singh, J. 2012, SoPh, 281, 67, doi: 10.1007/s1...

    1995

  17. [25]

    2008, ApJ, 685, 1270, doi: 10.1086/591225

    Landi, E. 2008, ApJ, 685, 1270, doi: 10.1086/591225

    2008 doi

  18. [26]

    2023, ApJL, 952, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ace423

    Lim, D., Van Doorsselaere, T., Berghmans, D., et al. 2023, ApJL, 952, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ace423

    2023 doi

  19. [27]

    W., De Moortel, I., & Wang, Y

    Liu, J., McIntosh, S. W., De Moortel, I., & Wang, Y. 2015, ApJ, 806, 273, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/806/2/273

    2015 doi

  20. [28]

    2018, ApJ, 856, 144, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aab42c

    Magyar, N., & Van Doorsselaere, T. 2018, ApJ, 856, 144, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aab42c

    2018 doi

  21. [29]

    2022, SolO/EUI Data Release 5.0 2022-04, https://doi.org/10.24414/2qfw-tr95

    Mampaey, B., Verbeeck, F., Stegen, K., et al. 2022, SolO/EUI Data Release 5.0 2022-04, https://doi.org/10.24414/2qfw-tr95

    2022 doi

  22. [30]

    2018, ApJ, 853, 134, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa1a3

    Mandal, S., Krishna Prasad, S., & Banerjee, D. 2018, ApJ, 853, 134, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaa1a3

    2018 doi

  23. [31]

    P., Antolin, P., et al

    Mandal, S., Chitta, L. P., Antolin, P., et al. 2022, A&A, 666, L2, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244403

    2022 doi

  24. [32]

    P., & de Moortel, I

    McEwan, M. P., & de Moortel, I. 2006, A&A, 448, 763, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054041

    2006 doi

  25. [33]

    W., de Pontieu, B., Carlsson, M., et al

    McIntosh, S. W., de Pontieu, B., Carlsson, M., et al. 2011, Nature, 475, 477, doi: 10.1038/nature10235

    2011 doi

  26. [34]

    Nakariakov, V. M. 2024, MNRAS, 527, 5302, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad3506

    2024 doi

  27. [35]

    Moran, T. G. 2001, A&A, 374, L9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010643

    2001 doi

  28. [36]

    J., Molnar, M., Cranmer, S

    Morton, R. J., Molnar, M., Cranmer, S. R., & Schad, T. A. 2025a, ApJ, 982, 104, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adb8df

    doi

  29. [37]

    J., Tomczyk, S., & Pinto, R

    Morton, R. J., Tomczyk, S., & Pinto, R. 2015, Nature Communications, 6, 7813, doi: 10.1038/ncomms8813

    2015 doi

  30. [38]

    J., Weberg, M

    Morton, R. J., Weberg, M. J., Balodhi, N., & McLaughlin, J. A. 2025b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2501.13673, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.13673 M¨ uller, D., St. Cyr, O. C., Zouganelis, I., et al. 2020, A&A, 642, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038467

    2020 doi arXiv

  31. [39]

    M., Ofman, L., Deluca, E

    Nakariakov, V. M., Ofman, L., Deluca, E. E., Roberts, B., & Davila, J. M. 1999, Science, 285, 862, doi: 10.1126/science.285.5429.862

    1999 doi

  32. [40]

    Ofman, L., & Deforest, C. E. 2000, Advances in Space Research, 25, 1909, doi: 10.1016/S0273-1177(99)00622-5

    2000 doi

  33. [41]

    M., & DeForest, C

    Ofman, L., Nakariakov, V. M., & DeForest, C. E. 1999, ApJ, 514, 441, doi: 10.1086/306944

    1999 doi

  34. [42]

    M., & Sehgal, N

    Ofman, L., Nakariakov, V. M., & Sehgal, N. 2000a, ApJ, 533, 1071, doi: 10.1086/308691

    doi

  35. [43]

    Ofman, L., Romoli, M., Poletto, G., Noci, G., & Kohl, J. L. 1997, ApJL, 491, L111, doi: 10.1086/311067 —. 2000b, ApJ, 529, 592, doi: 10.1086/308252

    1997 doi

  36. [44]

    2015, ApJ, 807, 71, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/807/1/71

    Pant, V., Dolla, L., Mazumder, R., et al. 2015, ApJ, 807, 71, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/807/1/71

    2015 doi

  37. [45]

    Pant, V., Magyar, N., Van Doorsselaere, T., & Morton, R. J. 2019, ApJ, 881, 95, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2da3

    2019 doi

  38. [46]

    2017, ApJL, 847, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa880f

    Pant, V., Tiwari, A., Yuan, D., & Banerjee, D. 2017, ApJL, 847, L5, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa880f

    2017 doi

  39. [47]

    2020, ApJ, 899, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba429

    Pant, V., & Van Doorsselaere, T. 2020, ApJ, 899, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aba429

    2020 doi

  40. [48]

    D., Thompson, B

    Pesnell, W. D., Thompson, B. J., & Chamberlin, P. C. 2012, SoPh, 275, 3, doi: 10.1007/s11207-011-9841-3

    2012 doi

  41. [49]

    2023, ApJ, 946, 36, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acb26a

    Berghmans, D. 2023, ApJ, 946, 36, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acb26a

    2023 doi

  42. [50]

    2015, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 12, 7, doi: 10.1007/lrsp-2015-7

    Poletto, G. 2015, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 12, 7, doi: 10.1007/lrsp-2015-7

    2015 doi

  43. [51]

    R., Warner, M., Keil, S

    Rimmele, T. R., Warner, M., Keil, S. L., et al. 2020, SoPh, 295, 172, doi: 10.1007/s11207-020-01736-7

    2020 doi

  44. [52]

    2019, MHD waves in the solar atmosphere

    Roberts, B. 2019, MHD waves in the solar atmosphere

    2019

  45. [53]

    2020, A&A, 642, A8, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936663

    Rochus, P., Auch` ere, F., Berghmans, D., et al. 2020, A&A, 642, A8, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201936663

    2020 doi

  46. [54]

    Saba, J. L. R., & Strong, K. T. 1991, ApJ, 375, 789, doi: 10.1086/170243

    1991 doi

  47. [55]

    2015, ApJL, 815, L16, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/815/1/L16

    Samanta, T., Pant, V., & Banerjee, D. 2015, ApJL, 815, L16, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/815/1/L16

    2015 doi

  48. [56]

    K., Pant, V., & Antolin, P

    Shrivastav, A. K., Pant, V., & Antolin, P. 2024a, A&A, 689, A295, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202449677

    doi

  49. [57]

    K., Pant, V., Kumar, R., et al

    Shrivastav, A. K., Pant, V., Kumar, R., et al. 2025, ApJ, 979, 6, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad95fb

    2025 doi

  50. [58]

    K., Pant, V., Berghmans, D., et al

    Shrivastav, A. K., Pant, V., Berghmans, D., et al. 2024b, A&A, 685, A36, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202346670

    doi

  51. [59]

    J., Samanta, T., & Van Doorsselaere, T

    Skirvin, S. J., Samanta, T., & Van Doorsselaere, T. 2024, A&A, 689, A135, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202450186

    2024 doi

  52. [60]

    W., & Bethge, C

    Threlfall, J., De Moortel, I., McIntosh, S. W., & Bethge, C. 2013, A&A, 556, A124, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321782

    2013 doi

  53. [61]

    O., Morton, R

    Thurgood, J. O., Morton, R. J., & McLaughlin, J. A. 2014, ApJL, 790, L2, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/790/1/L2

    2014 doi

  54. [62]

    W., Habbal, S

    Tian, H., McIntosh, S. W., Habbal, S. R., & He, J. 2011, ApJ, 736, 130, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/736/2/130

    2011 doi

  55. [63]

    W., Wang, T., et al

    Tian, H., McIntosh, S. W., Wang, T., et al. 2012, ApJ, 759, 144, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/759/2/144

    2012 doi

  56. [64]

    W., Keil, S

    Tomczyk, S., McIntosh, S. W., Keil, S. L., et al. 2007, Science, 317, 1192, doi: 10.1126/science.1143304

    2007 doi

  57. [65]

    L., Darnell, T., et al

    Tomczyk, S., Card, G. L., Darnell, T., et al. 2008, SoPh, 247, 411, doi: 10.1007/s11207-007-9103-6

    2008 doi

  58. [66]

    K., Prasad, S

    Tripathy, S. K., Prasad, S. K., & Banerjee, D. 2025, Properties of slow magneto-acoustic waves observed simultaneously using Hi-C 2.1 and AIA. https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.06126 Van Doorsselaere, T., Nakariakov, V. M., & Verwichte, E. 2008, ApJL, 676, L73, doi: 10.1086/587029 17...

    2025 arXiv

  59. [67]

    J., Morton, R

    Weberg, M. J., Morton, R. J., & McLaughlin, J. A. 2018, ApJ, 852, 57, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9e4a —. 2020, ApJ, 894, 79, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab7c59

    2018 doi

  60. [68]

    2006, A&A, 455, 697, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054693

    Wilhelm, K. 2006, A&A, 455, 697, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054693

    2006 doi

  61. [69]

    1998, SSRv, 85, 371, doi: 10.1023/A:1005187509676

    Wilhelm, K., & Bodmer, R. 1998, SSRv, 85, 371, doi: 10.1023/A:1005187509676

    1998 doi

  62. [70]

    P., et al

    Zouganelis, I., De Groof, A., Walsh, A. P., et al. 2020, A&A, 642, A3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202038445

    2020 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.