Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Variations in Dominant Wave Period in the Solar Atmosphere

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Observed dominant period of solar oscillations decreases with height, from 272 seconds in the photosphere to 167 seconds in the chromosphere, matching two-fluid simulations.

desk verdict The qualitative period decrease with height is almost certainly real, but the quantitative slope is not resolved by the data; fix the error analysis and the table inconsistencies before citing the gradient. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.07493 v1 pith:6FPGVYFB submitted 2025-06-09 astro-ph.SR

Pradeep Kayshap , K. Murawski , Z. E. Musielak , Suresh Babu This is my paper
classification astro-ph.SR
keywords quietSunsolaroscillationsdominantwaveperiodphotospherechromosphereIRISspectroscopywaveletanalysistwo-fluidsimulations
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 tries to establish that solar wave oscillations do not keep a fixed dominant period as they travel upward: the dominant period falls from roughly 272 seconds in the low photosphere to about 167 seconds in the chromosphere. The evidence comes from IRIS spectra of six photospheric absorption lines and the Mg ii h&k chromospheric line, which yield Doppler-velocity time series at nine distinct formation heights. Wavelet analysis of those time series gives a dominant period at each height, and the nine values fall on a decreasing line with a Pearson correlation of -0.917. A two-fluid numerical simulation of wave propagation through the solar atmosphere reproduces the same height-dependent shortening. If correct, the result turns the broad textbook transition from 5-minute photospheric oscillations to 3-minute chromospheric oscillations into a continuously measured filtering curve, offering a direct test of wave-filtering theory on the Sun.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is a height ladder built from seven spectral lines with nine formation levels: six photospheric absorption lines (Ni i, Fe i, Mn i) between 0.17 and 0.83 Mm, plus the optically thick Mg ii h&k chromospheric line, whose k2v, k2r, and k3 features form at chromospheric heights. Doppler velocities from each feature, measured at about 700 positions along the IRIS slit over a 34-minute sequence, are detrended and transformed with Morlet wavelet analysis; the peak of the global wavelet spectrum at each height, gathered into a histogram and fitted with a Gaussian, defines the dominant period. On the simulation side, the paper uses a two-fluid ion-neutral numerical model with ionization and recombination, initiated with a semi-empirical temperature profile and a 5 G vertical plus 0.5 G transverse magnetic field, to compute Fourier power spectra of the vertical velocity; the positions of the spectral peaks as a function of height are the simulated counterpart to the observed dominant-period ladder.

What would settle it

Re-observe the same quiet-Sun region with a multi-hour IRIS sit-and-stare sequence, recompute the global wavelet spectra for the same nine spectral features, and check whether the 20-50 s differences in dominant period between adjacent formation heights still exceed the width of the spectral peaks; if the differences fall inside the peaks, the claimed monotonic decrease is not resolved. A second, complementary check is to use lines with independently measured formation heights to see whether the same period-height slope emerges.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper claims that the wave spectrum is filtered continuously through the quiet-Sun atmosphere so that the dominant period decreases monotonically with height. The authors derive mean dominant periods of 272 s at 0.17 Mm, 234-240 s in the lower photosphere, 228-233 s in the mid-photosphere, 205 s at 0.83 Mm, and 184 s, 159 s, and 167 s for the three Mg ii h&k features (the two k2 peaks and the central k3 dip). A linear fit to mean period versus formation height gives a slope of -53.36 s/Mm with a Pearson coefficient of -0.917. The paper presents this as the first direct measurement of height-dependent dominant wave periods in the photosphere and chromosphere, and shows that two-fluid simulations including ionization and recombination reproduce the observed periods at the corresponding heights.

Load-bearing premise

The result stands on the model-based formation heights assigned to the seven spectral lines and on the 34-minute time series being long enough for the wavelet spectra to separate period differences of only 20-50 seconds between neighboring heights; if either assumption is wrong, the decreasing trend could be an artifact.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The textbook 5-minute photospheric and 3-minute chromospheric oscillations are linked by a continuous, roughly linear drop in dominant period, not by a sharp transition at a single height.
  • The narrowing of the period distributions (Gaussian sigma from about 49-54 s in the mid-photosphere to 24-28 s for the upper Mg ii features) implies that the atmosphere acts as a bandpass filter that sharpens the wave spectrum as it propagates upward.
  • In the simulations, the 300 s waves are evanescent above the photosphere while shorter-period waves propagate into the chromosphere and low corona, identifying acoustic cutoff filtering as the physical mechanism behind the observed shortening.
  • Because the same filtering behavior was predicted in solar-type stars, the solar measurements provide a nearby height-resolved case that can anchor similar inferences for stellar chromospheres.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An untested extension is whether the same monotonic period decrease appears in network and plage regions; the present quiet-Sun result may not carry over where the magnetic field shapes the cutoff frequencies.
  • If the formation heights carry systematic errors, the measured period-height curve could be inverted to constrain those heights, making the trend a diagnostic rather than a conclusion.
  • A longer time series would reveal whether the decrease continues into the upper chromosphere and transition region or flattens near the acoustic cutoff, where the k3 feature already shows a slight uptick from 159 s to 167 s.
  • The two-fluid simulation's success suggests that synthetic IRIS line profiles could be generated from the same model and compared directly to observed Doppler shifts, turning the period-height comparison into a full line-profile validation.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports IRIS sit-and-stare observations of six photospheric absorption lines and the Mg II h&k line (k2v, k2r, k3 features) to derive Doppler velocity time series at nine heights from 0.17 Mm to 2.2 Mm. Wavelet analysis yields global power spectra and dominant periods at each height; histograms of the dominant period from ~700 spatial locations are fit with Gaussians to obtain mean periods. The authors find that the mean dominant period decreases monotonically with height from ~272 s at 0.17 Mm to ~167 s at 1.80 Mm, with a linear fit of slope -53.36 s/Mm and a claimed Pearson coefficient of 0.944. They supplement this with 2.5-D two-fluid numerical simulations using the JOANNA code and report qualitative agreement between the simulated filtered wave spectra and the observed periods. The central claim is that these observations demonstrate, for the first time, the height variation of the dominant wave period in the quiet Sun.

Significance. If the height ordering and the monotonic decrease are quantitatively established, this result would directly confirm theoretical predictions of wave-spectrum filtering in the solar atmosphere, linking the photospheric 5-min oscillations to the chromospheric 3-min oscillations. The paper combines a clever use of IRIS NUV diagnostics with state-of-the-art two-fluid simulations, and the observational data are independent of the simulations. The direction of the trend is broadly consistent with existing knowledge, but the stated precision (a linear slope of -53.36 s/Mm, R=0.944) is not yet supported by the presented analysis, primarily because the period differences between adjacent heights are near the resolution limits and because key statistical and tabular quantities are inconsistent.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 3, Fig. 3(d) and text] The reported Pearson correlation coefficient is inconsistent: the text states 0.944, while Figure 3(d) shows R = -0.917. Since the period is expected to decrease with height, the sign in the figure is plausible, but the magnitudes disagree, and no uncertainty is given for either the coefficient or the fit parameters (slope -53.36 s/Mm, intercept 262.99). Please reconcile these values and provide error estimates, for example by bootstrapping the per-location dominant periods or by propagating the Gaussian-fit uncertainties of the histogram means.
  2. [Tables 1 and 2] The formation heights of the Mg II features are inconsistent between Table 1 and Table 2. Table 1 lists Mg II k2v at 1.20 Mm, k2r at 1.55 Mm, and k3 at 2.20 Mm, while Table 2 lists k2r at 1.2 Mm, k2v at 1.55 Mm, and k3 at 1.80 Mm. The text in Section 2 likewise appears to swap k2v and k2r. Because the ordering of heights is the basis for the claimed monotonic decrease, these discrepancies must be resolved and the adopted heights justified from the cited literature (Vernazza et al. 1981; Leenaarts et al. 2013).
  3. [Sec. 3, Table 2 and Fig. 3(c)] The differences in mean dominant period between adjacent heights (e.g., 6.4 s between Fe I 2792.327 and Fe I 2793.223; 5.3 s between Ni I 2799.347 and Fe I 2814.114; 12.6 s between the latter and Mn I 2801.907) are smaller than the wavelet scale spacing of a Morlet wavelet at periods 200–240 s with dj=0.125 (roughly 18–24 s) and are comparable to the Fourier resolution of the 34-minute time series (1/T ≈ 0.5 mHz, i.e., ≈25 s at 200 s). The paper reports only the Gaussian standard deviations (23–54 s) of the histograms, not the standard error of the mean or confidence intervals. Please demonstrate that the inter-height differences are statistically significant (e.g., via bootstrap or Monte Carlo) and explicitly address the wavelet/frequency resolution limits when claiming a monotonic decrease.
  4. [Sec. 4, Fig. 5] The comparison between the observed dominant periods (dots) and the simulated Fourier power spectrum is described as “good agreement,” but no quantitative metric is provided. The simulation exhibits broad period bands (P≈300 s for y<0.5 Mm and 200<P<250 s higher up), while the observed dots are discrete; it is unclear how the dots are assigned to the simulation features and what tolerance is acceptable. Please define the comparison criterion (e.g., nearest-band assignment or chi-square statistic) and provide quantitative residuals between the observed periods and the simulation-derived periods at the corresponding heights.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract contains a duplicated word: “well well-established.”
  2. [References] Several references are duplicated in the bibliography (e.g., Kayshap et al. 2018, Leenaarts et al. 2013, Wiśniewska et al. 2016). Please consolidate the list.
  3. [Fig. 5 caption] The caption states “Time-distance plots for horizontally Viy”; this appears incomplete and should read “horizontally averaged Viy.”
  4. [Table 1] The table formatting has issues: the last row is numbered “7” again, the Mg II entries use “..” for missing uncertainties, and the text says seven spectral lines are used while the table lists nine features. Please clarify the numbering and the definition of “lines” vs. “features.”
  5. [Sec. 2] The sentence “Mgiik2r (Mgiik2r) form at a height of 1.2 Mm (1.55 Mm)” appears to have a typo in the parentheses; it likely should read “k2v (k2r).”
  6. [Throughout] The symbol “sit-n-stare” is nonstandard; the usual term is “sit-and-stare.”

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the observational period-height relation is measured independently, and the numerical simulation is a forward model with no free parameters fitted to the observed periods.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is an observational one: the dominant wavelet period, measured from IRIS Doppler-velocity time series at nine spectral-line formation heights, decreases from about 272 s in the photosphere to about 167 s in the chromosphere. This measurement is independent of the numerical simulation; the simulation is performed with the JOANNA two-fluid code using initially fixed magnetic field strengths (B_y = 5 G, B_z = 0.5 G), a bottom boundary velocity amplitude of 0.2 km/s, and a semi-empirical temperature model from Avrett and Loeser (2008). None of these inputs are tuned to reproduce the observed period-height trend, and the paper does not fit any model parameter to the observed periods. The comparison in Figure 5 is a posteriori validation, not a fitted prediction. The paper does cite prior work by overlapping authors (e.g., Fawzy and Musielak 2012, 2016; Kayshap et al. 2018; Wójcik et al. 2019) for the filtered-spectrum concept, the JOANNA code, and the existence of cutoff-frequency variations, but these citations are background or code provenance rather than load-bearing evidence for the new observational result. The alleged circularity concern about the wavelet frequency resolution of a 34-minute series and the inconsistency in Table 1 versus Table 2 heights is a correctness/statistics issue, not a circularity issue: the derivation chain does not reduce to its inputs by construction. Therefore no circular step can be quoted, and the appropriate score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on model-based formation heights, a relatively short time series, and a complex simulation with several chosen parameters. The only numerically fitted quantities are the descriptive Gaussian means and the linear trend; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Gaussian mean dominant period for each spectral feature = 271.9, 234.1, 240.5, 227.9, 233.2, 204.6, 183.7, 159.4, 167.0 s (Table 2)
    Fitted to histograms of per-pixel dominant periods; these means are the Y values in the central trend.
  • Detrending smoothing window width = 12 points (204 s)
    Chosen ad hoc; subtracting this smoothed series may suppress power near 204 s and bias the dominant period.
  • Linear fit slope and intercept = -53.36 s/Mm and 262.99 s
    Least-squares fit to the nine mean periods; descriptive, not an input to the analysis.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Formation heights for the seven spectral lines are taken from ITN39 and Leenaarts et al. 2013.
    The height ordering of the nine measurements rests on these tabulated values, which are not verified within this dataset.
  • domain assumption Doppler velocity time series from different lines represent the same oscillation field at their respective formation heights.
    Line-formation and opacity differences could introduce period biases that masquerade as a height trend.
  • standard math The wavelet analysis of Torrence and Compo (1998) with the 95% confidence contour gives reliable dominant periods.
    Standard method, but the peak of the global power spectrum is used without uncertainty propagation.
  • domain assumption The semi-empirical atmosphere of Avrett and Loeser (2008) is an adequate initial state for the quiet-Sun simulations.
    The simulation's wave spectrum depends on the temperature and density structure.
  • domain assumption The magnetic field (By=5 G, Bz=0.5 G) and bottom boundary driver (0.2 km/s) represent quiet Sun conditions.
    These values are chosen from prior work; the resulting periods in the simulation depend on them.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Variations in Dominant Wave Period in the Solar Atmosphere." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6FPGVYFB

@misc{pith2026250607493,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Variations in Dominant Wave Period in the Solar Atmosphere},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6FPGVYFB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.07493}
}
read the original abstract

Waves are an integral part of the solar atmosphere, and their characteristics (e.g., dominant period, range of periods, power, and phase angle) change on a diverse spatio-temporal scale. It is well well-established observationally that the dominant periods of solar oscillations are 5-min and 3-min in the photosphere and chromosphere, respectively. This shows that the wave spectra and their dominant periods evolve between these two layers. We present observational results that demonstrate variations of the dominant period with heights in the photosphere and chromosphere. Six photospheric absorption lines and one chromospheric line are analyzed by using the IRIS data, and the Doppler velocity time series at seven different atmospheric heights are determined. The wavelet analysis is applied to these time series, and the resulting spectrum of wave periods and its dominant period are deduced at these heights, which gives height variations of the dominant period. The obtained data shows that the dominant period decreases with height, and that there are also changes in the range of wave periods within the spectrum. Numerical simulations of filtered wave spectra through the solar atmosphere are also performed, and the obtained results match the observational data.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.07493 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The left panel shows the AIA 193 ˚A map and the overplotted blue box is the region observed by IRIS. The top-right panel shows the transition-region image (IRIS/SJI 1400 ˚A) corresponding to the blue box, while the bottom-right panel shows the photospheric image (i.e., IRIS/SJI 2832 ˚A). The overplotted red line in both right panels is the slit location, and IRIS has captured the spectra from the region below the sl… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The panel (a) displays the original DTS (black curve) and smoothed DTS (red dashed curve) from one particular spatial location in Ni i 2815.18 ˚A. The smoothed DTS is produced using gauss smooth.pro with a window size of 12 points. The original DTS-smoothed DTS (black curve-red curve) is displayed in panel (b). Finally, the wavelet power map is shown in panel (c). The overplotted blue contour is the 95% significance… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The global wavelet power deduced using wavelet power maps shown in panels (c) and (f) in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The figure shows the spatial profile of log Ti(x, y, t = 5 · 103 s), overlaid by magnetic field lines and Vi vectors (top panel). The time-distance plots for horizontally averaged Ti is displayed in the bottom panel. REFERENCES Aschwanden, M. J. 2019, New Millennium So…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Time-distance plots for horizontally Viy is shown in the top panel. Fourier power spectrum of dominant wave period P for Viy taken from bottom-left panel for 2 · 103 s ≤ t ≤ 5 · 103 s. The dots correspond to the observational data presented in this paper [PITH_FULL_IM…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Signatures of photospheric convection throughout the solar atmosphere: the EVE Sun-as-a-star mHz continuum

    astro-ph.SR 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    EVE Sun-as-a-star Doppler spectra of 26 EUV lines reveal Harvey-like convective continua to 50 mHz, reduced granulation power in coronal lines, ~15 km/s nonthermal RMS, and no Kolmogorov turbulence.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  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]

    C ].@V y @ o_OX- ?= [Lÿnø2^>x = / oi _ut٭ [|smβYɤ:6 BC A O \Ŋ)LXXLtp,E uOjͤ [k- a#zO l ] i5 ޲ *y

    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...

    1918

  4. [4]

    Aschwanden, M. J. 2019, New Millennium Solar Physics, Vol. 458, Springer, doi:10.1007/978-3-030-13956-8

    doi:10.1007/978-3-030-13956-8 2019

  5. [5]

    H., & Loeser, R

    Avrett, E. H., & Loeser, R. 2008, Models of the solar chromosphere and transition region from SUMER and HRTS observations: Formation of the extreme-ultraviolet spectrum of hydrogen, carbon, and oxygen, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 175, 229--276, doi:10.1086/523671

    doi:10.1086/523671 2008

  6. [6]

    R., Kjeldsen, H., Arentoft, T., et al

    Bedding, T. R., Kjeldsen, H., Arentoft, T., et al. 2007, Solar-like Oscillations in the G2 Subgiant Hydri from Dual-Site Observations, , 663, 1315--1324, doi:10.1086/518593

    doi:10.1086/518593 2007

  7. [7]

    2006, , 640, 1153, doi:10.1086/500185

    Centeno, R., Collados, M., & Trujillo Bueno, J. 2006, , 640, 1153, doi:10.1086/500185

    doi:10.1086/500185 2006

  8. [8]

    2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 692, 1211, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/692/2/1211, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...692.1211C

    Centeno, R., Collados, M., & Trujillo Bueno, J. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 692, 1211, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/692/2/1211, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009ApJ...692.1211C

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/692/2/1211 2009

Show all 67 references
  1. [9]

    J., Bedding, T

    Chaplin, W. J., Bedding, T. R., Bonanno, A., et al. 2011, Evidence for the Impact of Stellar Activity on the Detectability of Solar-like Oscillations Observed by Kepler, , 732, L5, doi:10.1088/2041-8205/732/1/L5

    2011 doi

  2. [10]

    J., Kjeldsen, H., Christensen-Dalsgaard, J., et al

    Chaplin, W. J., Kjeldsen, H., Christensen-Dalsgaard, J., et al. 2011, Ensemble Asteroseismology of Solar-Type Stars with the NASA Kepler Mission, Science, 332, 213, doi:10.1126/science.1201827

    2011 doi

  3. [11]

    De Pontieu, B., Erdélyi, R., & de Wijn, A. G. 2003, Intensity Oscillations in the Upper Transition Region above Active Region Plage, , 595, L63--L66, doi:10.1086/378843

    2003 doi

  4. [12]

    M., Lemen, J

    De Pontieu, B., Title, A. M., Lemen, J. R., et al. 2014, The Interface Region Imaging Spectrograph (IRIS), , 289, 2733--2779, doi:10.1007/s11207-014-0485-y

    2014 doi

  5. [13]

    1991, Observations of Waves and Oscillations (With 2 Figures), In Mechanisms of Chromospheric and Coronal Heating, ed

    Deubner, F.-L. 1991, Observations of Waves and Oscillations (With 2 Figures), In Mechanisms of Chromospheric and Coronal Heating, ed. P. Ulmschneider, E. R. Priest, & R. Rosner, 260

    1991

  6. [14]

    1998, Phase relations and other diagnostics of solar atmospheric structure and dynamics, In New Eyes to See Inside the Sun and Stars, ed

    Deubner, F.-L. 1998, Phase relations and other diagnostics of solar atmospheric structure and dynamics, In New Eyes to See Inside the Sun and Stars, ed. F.-L. Deubner, J. Christensen-Dalsgaard, & D. Kurtz, IAU Symposium Vol. 185, 427

    1998

  7. [15]

    E., & Musielak, Z

    Fawzy, D. E., & Musielak, Z. E. 2012, , 421, 159, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.20285.x

    2012

  8. [16]

    E., & Musielak, Z

    Fawzy, D. E., & Musielak, Z. E. 2016, Theoretical prediction of chromospheric oscillations in late-type stars, , 361, 23, doi:10.1007/s10509-015-2600-4

    2016 doi

  9. [17]

    2018, Height variation of the cutoff frequency in a sunspot umbra, , 617, A39, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833155

    Felipe, T., Kuckein, C., & Thaler, I. 2018, Height variation of the cutoff frequency in a sunspot umbra, , 617, A39, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833155

    2018 doi

  10. [18]

    1991, , 250, 235

    Fleck, B., & Schmitz, F. 1991, , 250, 235

    1991

  11. [19]

    1993, , 273, 671, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993A&A...273..671F

    Fleck, B., & Schmitz, F. 1993, , 273, 671, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1993A&A...273..671F

    1993

  12. [20]

    S., & Kalkofen, W

    Hasan, S. S., & Kalkofen, W. 1999, Excitation of Oscillations in Photospheric Flux Tubes through Buffeting by External Granules, , 519, 899--910, doi:10.1086/307404

    1999 doi

  13. [21]

    H., De Pontieu, B., & Carlsson, M

    Heggland, L., Hansteen, V. H., De Pontieu, B., & Carlsson, M. 2011, , 743, 142, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/743/2/142

    2011 doi

  14. [22]

    R., Stello, D., et al

    Huber, D., Bedding, T. R., Stello, D., et al. 2011, Testing Scaling Relations for Solar-like Oscillations from the Main Sequence to Red Giants Using Kepler Data, , 743, 143, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/743/2/143

    2011 doi

  15. [23]

    B., Jafarzadeh, S., Keys, P

    Jess, D. B., Jafarzadeh, S., Keys, P. H., et al. 2023, Waves in the lower solar atmosphere: the dawn of next-generation solar telescopes, Living Reviews in Solar Physics, 20, 1, doi:10.1007/s41116-022-00035-6

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    1994, Propagation of acoustic waves in a stratified atmosphere I, , 284, 976--984

    Kalkofen, W., Rossi, P., Bodo, G., & Massaglia, S. 1994, Propagation of acoustic waves in a stratified atmosphere I, , 284, 976--984

    1994

  17. [26]

    K., Musielak, Z

    Kayshap, P., Murawski, K., Srivastava, A. K., Musielak, Z. E., & Dwivedi, B. N.\ 2018, , 479, 5512, doi:10.1093/mnras/sty1861

    2018 doi

  18. [27]

    Kuźma, B., Kadowaki, L. H. S., Murawski, K., et al. 2024, Magnetoacoustic cutoff effect in numerical simulations of the partially ionized solar atmosphere, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 382, 20230218, doi:10.1098/rsta.2023.0218

    2024

  19. [29]

    Leenaarts, J., Pereira, T. M. D., Carlsson, M., Uitenbroek, H., & De Pontieu, B. 2013,vThe Formation of IRIS Diagnostics. I. A Quintessential Model Atom of Mg II and General Formation Properties of the Mg II h&k Lines, , 772, 89, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/772/2/89

    2013 doi

  20. [30]

    Leenaarts, J., Pereira, T. M. D., Carlsson, M., Uitenbroek, H., & De Pontieu, B.\ 2013, , 772, 90, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/772/2/90

    2013 doi

  21. [31]

    phere. I. Preliminary Report, , 135, 474, doi:10.1086/147285

    doi

  22. [32]

    R., Title, A

    Lemen, J. R., Title, A. M., Akin, D. J., et al. 2012, The Atmospheric Imaging Assembly (AIA) on the Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO), , 275, 17--40, doi:10.1007/s11207-011-9776-8

    2012 doi

  23. [33]

    W., & Chipman, E

    Lites, B. W., & Chipman, E. G. 1979, , 231, 570, doi:10.1086/157219

    1979 doi

  24. [34]

    W., Rutten, R

    Lites, B. W., Rutten, R. J., & Kalkofen, W. 1993, Dynamics of the Solar Chromosphere. I. Long-Period Network Oscillations, The Astrophysical Journal, 414, 345, doi:10.1086/173081

    1993 doi

  25. [35]

    2017, Kink Waves in Thin Stratified Magnetically Twisted Flux Tubes, , 840, 26, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6c5a

    Lopin, I., & Nagorny, I. 2017, Kink Waves in Thin Stratified Magnetically Twisted Flux Tubes, , 840, 26, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa6c5a

    2017 doi

  26. [36]

    McAteer, R. T. J., Gallagher, P. T., Williams, D. R., et al. 2002, Long-Period Chromospheric Oscillations in Network Bright Points, , 567, L165--L168, doi:10.1086/340110

    2002 doi

  27. [37]

    McAteer, R. T. J., Gallagher, P. T., Williams, D. R., et al. 2003, Observational Evidence for Mode Coupling in the Chromospheric Network, The Astrophysical Journal, 587, 806--817, doi:10.1086/368304

    2003 doi

  28. [38]

    E., Srivastava, A

    Murawski, K., Solov'ev, A., Musielak, Z. E., Srivastava, A. K., Kraśkiewicz, J. (2015). Torsional Alfvén waves in solar magnetic flux tubes of axial symmetry. , 577, A126. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201424545

    2015 doi

  29. [39]

    E., Konkol, P., & Wiśniewska, A

    Murawski, K., Musielak, Z. E., Konkol, P., & Wiśniewska, A. 2016, , 827, 37, doi:10.3847/0004-637X/827/1/37

    2016 doi

  30. [40]

    Murawski, Z

    K. Murawski, Z. E. Musielak, and D. Wójcik, ``3D numerical simulations of solar quiet chromosphere wave heating,'' , vol. 896, no. 1, p. L1, Jun. 2020. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab94a9

    2020 doi

  31. [41]

    E., Poedts, S., Srivastava, A

    Murawski, K., Musielak, Z. E., Poedts, S., Srivastava, A. K., & Kadowaki, L. 2022, Two-fluid numerical model of chromospheric heating and plasma outflows in a quiet-Sun, , 367, 111, doi:10.1007/s10509-022-04152-4

    2022 doi

  32. [42]

    E., & Ulmschneider, P.\ 2003a, , 406, 725

    Musielak, Z. E., & Ulmschneider, P.\ 2003a, , 406, 725. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20030749

    doi

  33. [43]

    E., & Ulmschneider, P.\ 2003b, , 400, 1057, doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20030023

    Musielak, Z. E., & Ulmschneider, P.\ 2003b, , 400, 1057, doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20030023

    doi

  34. [44]

    E., Musielak, D

    Musielak, Z. E., Musielak, D. E., & Mobashi, H. 2006, Physical Review E, 73, 036612, doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.73.036612

    2006 doi

  35. [45]

    E., Routh, S., & Hammer, R

    Musielak, Z. E., Routh, S., & Hammer, R. 2007, Cutoff-free Propagation of Torsional Alfvén Waves along Thin Magnetic Flux Tubes, , 659, 650--654, doi:10.1086/512776

    2007 doi

  36. [46]

    M., Zhong, Y., & Kolotkov, D

    Nakariakov, V. M., Zhong, Y., & Kolotkov, D. Y. 2024, Transition from decaying to decayless kink oscillations of solar coronal loops, , 531, 4611--4618, doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1483

    2024 doi

  37. [47]

    2023, Cutoff of transverse waves through the solar transition region, , 672, A105, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245049

    Pelouze, G., Van Doorsselaere, T., Karampelas, K., et al. 2023, Cutoff of transverse waves through the solar transition region, , 672, A105, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245049

    2023 doi

  38. [48]

    Pereira, T. M. D., Leenaarts, J., De Pontieu, B., Carlsson, M., & Uitenbroek, H. 2013, The Formation of IRIS Diagnostics. III. Near-ultraviolet Spectra and Images, , 778, 143, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/778/2/143

    2013 doi

  39. [49]

    Pereira, T. M. D., De Pontieu, B., Carlsson, M., et al.\ 2014, , 792, L15, doi:10.1088/2041-8205/792/1/L15

    2014 doi

  40. [50]

    2004, MHD Waves in the Solar Atmosphere, In SOHO 13 Waves, Oscillations and Small-Scale Transients Events in the Solar Atmosphere: Joint View from SOHO and TRACE, ed

    Roberts, B. 2004, MHD Waves in the Solar Atmosphere, In SOHO 13 Waves, Oscillations and Small-Scale Transients Events in the Solar Atmosphere: Joint View from SOHO and TRACE, ed. H. Lacoste, ESA Special Publication, Vol. 547, 1

    2004

  41. [51]

    2006, Slow magnetohydrodynamic waves in the solar atmosphere, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 364, 447--460, doi:10.1098/rsta.2005.1709

    Roberts, B. 2006, Slow magnetohydrodynamic waves in the solar atmosphere, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 364, 447--460, doi:10.1098/rsta.2005.1709

    2006

  42. [52]

    E., & Hammer, R

    Routh, S., Musielak, Z. E., & Hammer, R. 2010, Temperature Gradients in the Solar Atmosphere and the Origin of Cutoff Frequency for Torsional Tube Waves, , 709, 1297--1305, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/709/2/1297

    2010 doi

  43. [53]

    E., & Hammer, R

    Routh, S., Musielak, Z. E., & Hammer, R. 2013, Global and Local Cutoff Frequencies for Transverse Waves Propagating along Solar Magnetic Flux Tubes, The Astrophysical Journal, 763, 44, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/763/1/44

    2013 doi

  44. [54]

    Routh, S., & Musielak, Z. E. 2014, Astronomische Nachrichten, 335, 1043, doi:10.1002/asna.201412128

    2014 doi

  45. [55]

    Saha, M. N. 1920, Ionisation in the solar chromosphere, Nature, 105, 232--233, doi:10.1038/105232b0

    1920 doi

  46. [56]

    K., Kayshap, P., Yuan, D., & Scullion, E

    Sangal, K., Srivastava, A. K., Kayshap, P., Yuan, D., & Scullion, E. 2024, , 966, 187, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad36ca

    2024 doi

  47. [57]

    R., & Tritschler, A

    Schlichenmaier, R., Bellot Rubio, L. R., & Tritschler, A. 2005, On the relation between penumbral intensity and flow filaments, Astronomische Nachrichten, 326, 301--304, doi:10.1002/asna.200410394

    2005 doi

  48. [58]

    1995, On the generation of resonance oscillations in plane atmospheres, , 301, 483

    Schmitz, F., & Fleck, B. 1995, On the generation of resonance oscillations in plane atmospheres, , 301, 483

    1995

  49. [59]

    1998, , 337, 487, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998A&A...337..487S

    Schmitz, F., & Fleck, B. 1998, , 337, 487, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998A&A...337..487S

    1998

  50. [60]

    Skogsrud, H., Rouppe van der Voort, L., De Pontieu, B., & Pereira, T. M. D.\ 2015, , 806, 170, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/806/2/170

    2015 doi

  51. [61]

    2010, Detection of Solar-like Oscillations from Kepler Photometry of the Open Cluster NGC 6819, , 713, L182--L186, doi:10.1088/2041-8205/713/2/L182

    Stello, D., Basu, S., Bruntt, H., et al. 2010, Detection of Solar-like Oscillations from Kepler Photometry of the Open Cluster NGC 6819, , 713, L182--L186, doi:10.1088/2041-8205/713/2/L182

    2010 doi

  52. [62]

    2004, The Sun: An Introduction, Springer

    Stix, M. 2004, The Sun: An Introduction, Springer

    2004

  53. [63]

    Torrence, C., & Compo, G. P. 1998, A Practical Guide to Wavelet Analysis, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 79, 61--78, doi:10.1175/1520-0477(1998)079<0061:APGTWA>2.0.CO;2

    1998 doi

  54. [64]

    E., Avrett, E

    Vernazza, J. E., Avrett, E. H., & Loeser, R. 1981, Structure of the solar chromosphere. III. Models of the EUV brightness components of the quiet sun, , 45, 635--725, doi:10.1086/190731

    1981 doi

  55. [66]

    E., Staiger, J., & Roth, M.\ 2016, , 819, L23, doi:10.3847/2041-8205/819/2/L23

    Wi \'s niewska, A., Musielak, Z. E., Staiger, J., & Roth, M.\ 2016, , 819, L23, doi:10.3847/2041-8205/819/2/L23

    2016 doi

  56. [67]

    E., Konkol, P., & Mignone, A

    Wójcik, D., Murawski, K., Musielak, Z. E., Konkol, P., & Mignone, A. 2017, Numerical Simulations of Torsional Alfvén Waves in Axisymmetric Solar Magnetic Flux Tubes, , 292, 31, doi:10.1007/s11207-017-1058-7

    2017 doi

  57. [68]

    K.\ 2019, , 884, 127

    W \'o jcik, D., Ku \'z ma, B., Murawski, K., & Srivastava, A. K.\ 2019, , 884, 127. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab26b1

    2019 doi

  58. [69]

    Wójcik, D., Murawski, K., & Musielak, Z. E. 2019, Partially ionized solar atmosphere: Two-fluid waves and their cutoffs, , 882, 32, doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab3224

    2019 doi

  59. [70]

    E.\ 2020, , 635, A28.doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936938

    W \'o jcik, D., Ku \'z ma, B., Murawski, K., & Musielak, Z. E.\ 2020, , 635, A28.doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201936938

    2020 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.