Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 50 references

The effect of plasma expansion on the dispersion properties of MHD waves

T0 review · 3 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 The paper's central claim is that solar-wind expansion alters MHD wave dispersion only by making the Alfvén and sound speeds decay with heliocentric distance.

desk verdict Oblique dispersion relations don't follow from the EBM equations because the Fourier replacement drops the anisotropic gradient factor; parallel results are fine. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.08248 v2 pith:GR2VG4HP submitted 2025-06-09 physics.plasm-ph astro-ph.SR

Sebastián Saldivia , Felipe A. Asenjo , Pablo S. Moya This is my paper
classification physics.plasm-phastro-ph.SR PACS 52.35.Bj96.50.Ci
keywords expandingboxmodelsolarwindMHDwavesAlfvénfastmagnetosonicmodeslowpolytropicindexdispersionrelation
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

The paper works in the Expanding Box Model, a solar-wind frame that absorbs spherical expansion into time-dependent inertial forces, and linearizes the ideal MHD equations around the expanding background. Its central claim is that the resulting dispersion relations for Alfvén, fast, and slow magnetosonic waves have exactly the same algebraic form as in a homogeneous, non-expanding plasma, provided the Alfvén speed is replaced by $v_A(R)\propto 1/R$ and the sound speed by $v_S(R)\propto 1/R^{\gamma-1}$. If true, this means the entire linear effect of solar-wind expansion on these waves is a radial rescaling of the two characteristic speeds. The paper emphasizes that all wave frequencies therefore decrease with heliocentric distance, and that the fast magnetosonic mode can accelerate in the outer heliosphere when the polytropic index drops below one.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Expanding Box Model coordinate transformation, which rescales transverse coordinates by $a(t)=R(t)/R_0$ so the box volume stays constant and expansion enters as inertial terms proportional to $\dot a/a$. The derivation's key step is the weak-expansion Fourier analysis of the first-order linearized equations (21)-(24): with perturbations written as $\phi_1 e^{i(\mathbf{k}\cdot\mathbf{r}-\omega t)}$ and the expansion rate assumed much slower than the wave frequency, the paper obtains $n_1$, $p_1$, and $\mathbf{B}_1$ in terms of $\mathbf{u}_1$, and assembles a $3\times3$ wave matrix whose determinant gives the dispersion relation. The $R$-dependence enters because the zeroth-order background density, pressure, and magnetic field all carry powers of $a(t)$.

What would settle it

Run a linearized numerical experiment of an oblique wave in the Expanding Box and compare the measured frequency at fixed wave vector and angle with Equations (39)-(41); any mismatch at nonzero $\theta$ would show that the Fourier replacement of the stretched gradient is not valid.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Starting from the zeroth-order background profiles ($n_0\propto a^{-2}$, $p_0\propto a^{-2\gamma}$, $B_0$ decaying according to the matrix $Z$), the paper solves the first-order equations for the perturbed density, pressure, and magnetic field and substitutes them into the momentum equation. Setting the determinant of the resulting wave matrix to zero yields $\omega^2 = k^2\tilde v_A(R)^2\cos^2\theta$ for the Alfvén mode and coupled expressions for the fast and slow roots, where $\tilde v_A^2 = v_A^2R_0^2/R^2$ and $\tilde v_S^2 = v_S^2R_0^{2\gamma-2}/R^{2\gamma-2}$. The paper's own reading of this result is that expansion leaves the ideal MHD wave taxonomy intact and simply makes the characteristic speeds $R$-dependent. This produces a general decrease of wave frequencies with distance and, for a polytropic index that falls below 1, an increase of the fast magnetosonic frequency and phase speed in the outer heliosphere.

Load-bearing premise

The central assumption is that, because wave oscillations are much faster than the expansion, the stretched gradient in the Expanding Box can be replaced by the plain Fourier wave vector $\mathbf{k}$; the coordinate-stretching matrix then never modifies the wave vector in the dispersion relation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Alfvén and slow magnetosonic frequencies and phase speeds fall monotonically with heliocentric distance, becoming very low in the outer heliosphere, which the paper connects to a loss of wave energy during expansion.
  • The fast magnetosonic mode's radial behavior depends on the polytropic index: with $\gamma=5/3$ it decays monotonically, while with a polytropic index that drops below 1 the mode accelerates, with frequency and phase speed rising beyond roughly 20 AU.
  • In the non-expanding limit $R/R_0=1$, Equations (39)-(41) reduce exactly to the classic ideal MHD dispersion relations for Alfvén, fast, and slow waves.
  • Observed wave frequencies at different heliocentric distances can, in principle, be inverted to estimate the local polytropic index of the expanding solar wind.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the radial-rescaling picture survives, solar-wind turbulence and heating models can keep the standard three-wave taxonomy while sliding the speeds along their $R$-dependent profiles, which is a simpler computational input than time-dependent mode conversion.
  • Because the paper fixes the background field along the radial direction, the most immediate extension is to oblique background-field geometries; whether the same-form dispersion relation survives there would determine how directly Equations (39)-(41) can be applied to in situ measurements.
  • The proposed inversion, using observed wave frequencies to recover $\gamma(R)$, could be checked against independent thermodynamic estimates of the polytropic index at the same heliocentric distances, giving a cross-validation of both.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper linearizes the ideal MHD equations in the Expanding Box Model (EBM) of Velli et al. and derives dispersion relations for the Alfvén, fast, and slow magnetosonic waves. The central claim is that the dispersion relations retain the standard ideal-MHD algebraic form, with the Alfvén speed replaced by vA(R)=vA0 R0/R and the sound speed by vS(R)=vS0 (R0/R)^{γ-1}. Three models for the polytropic index are then used to study the radial evolution of the fast mode, predicting an acceleration when γ<1 in the outer heliosphere.

Significance. If correct, the result would give a compact analytic description of expansion effects on linear MHD waves in the solar wind, useful for interpreting EBM simulations and in-situ observations. The paper is clearly organized, uses the standard EBM equations, and the parallel-propagation subset of the derivation is plausible and recovers the non-expanding limit. However, the central oblique-propagation result is not supported by the stated equations because the anisotropic EBM gradient is replaced by an isotropic wave vector without justification. The polytropic-index model with decreasing γ also requires an additional assumption about the background pressure profile. The significance is therefore conditional on a corrected derivation.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3.2, Eqs. (4), (24), (30)] The Fourier replacement ∇→ik is not valid for oblique propagation because the EBM gradient is anisotropic. Equation (4) defines ∇ = A^{-1}·∇' with A^{-1}=diag(1,1/a,1/a), and the first-order magnetic terms in Eq. (24) explicitly contain A^{-1}·∇. Replacing every ∇ by ik in Eqs. (26)-(30) drops these A^{-1} factors. For k=(k cosθ,0,k sinθ), the transverse component should enter as k sinθ/a, so the effective wave vector is (k cosθ,0,k sinθ/a), not k. This affects the dispersion matrix (34), the determinant (37), and the eigenfrequencies (39)-(41), and it invalidates the oblique θ=45° and θ=80° curves in Figures 3 and 4. The parallel case θ=0 is more defensible because only the x-component enters and A^{-1} acts as a common scalar; the general claim in the abstract and Section 5 is not supported by the stated equations.
  2. [Sec. 4.2, Eqs. (8), (18), (36)] The radially varying polytropic profiles of Livadiotis et al. and Nicolaou et al. are inserted into the dispersion relation through vS(R) ∝ (R0/R)^{γ(R)-1}, but the background pressure profile p0 ∝ a^{-2γ} used in Eq. (18) follows from Eq. (8) only when γ is constant along the expansion. If γ is a function of time or heliocentric distance, the background pressure evolves as p0 ∝ exp(-2∫ γ(a) da/a), which is not equal to a^{-2γ(R)}. The acceleration of the fast magnetosonic mode for the γ(R) model in Figure 4 therefore rests on an additional, unstated assumption. The authors should either justify a slow-variation treatment of γ(R) or derive the modified background profiles.
  3. [Sec. 4, Eq. (37)] The first factor in the printed determinant should be ω^2/k^2 - vA(R)^2 cos^2 θ, not ω^2/k^2 - vA(R)^2 cos θ. The matrix in Eq. (34) has cos^2 θ on the Alfvén diagonal, and the eigenfrequency in Eq. (41) is ω^2 = k^2 vA(R)^2 cos^2 θ. As written, Eq. (37) is not the determinant of Eq. (34) and would give unphysical behavior for obtuse angles. This needs correction independently of the gradient issue in the first major comment.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (18)] Equation (18) writes p(0)=n0/a^{2γ}, but pressure and number density have different dimensions; the subsequent equations treat p0 as an initial pressure constant. This should read p(0)=p0/a^{2γ} with p0 defined explicitly.
  2. [Sec. 3.2] The weak-expansion condition is stated backwards: the text says 'the frequency scale 1/τ of the solar wind expansion is much larger than that of the oscillations ω', but the required condition is 1/τ << ω, i.e., the expansion time scale is much longer than the wave period.
  3. [Section 5] The statement that the background magnetic field decay 'shows rotation in the x-y plane, naturally representing the Parker spiral' is not demonstrated; with B0 along x, the field simply decays as 1/a^2 without rotating.
  4. [Abstract] The phrase 'first-order expansion of the MHD-EBM equations' is misleading; the calculation is a linearization in the perturbation amplitude, not an expansion in the expansion parameter. Rephrase as 'linearization'.
  5. [Figures 3 and 4] The normalization of the phase speed ω/(kvA) should state explicitly whether vA is the local Alfvén speed vA(R) or the initial constant vA0; this changes the interpretation of the plotted radial trends.
  6. [Eqs. (39)-(40)] In the difference term inside the square root, the sound speed should be denoted with the tilde consistently, i.e., (\tilde v_A(R)^2 - \tilde v_S(R)^2)^2, to avoid confusion with the un-tilded initial value.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: dispersion relations are derived from the stated EBM equations and externally adopted gamma profiles, not fitted to the target result.

full rationale

I find no circular step in this paper. The dispersion relations (37)-(41) are obtained by linearizing the MHD-EBM equations (7)-(10), solving the zeroth-order background profiles (17)-(19), substituting traveling-wave perturbations, and computing the determinant of the resulting wave matrix (34). The R-dependent Alfven and sound speeds (35)-(36) follow algebraically from the derived background density, pressure, and magnetic-field profiles; they are not fitted to the final dispersion relations. The polytropic-index models used in Section 4.2 are adopted from external sources [47,48] and are not calibrated to the wave frequencies; the claimed fast-mode acceleration at gamma < 1 is an arithmetic consequence of vS(R) proportional to R^(1-gamma) inside the fast-mode formula (39), not a circular prediction. Citations [31,43,36] supply the EBM equations, but those equations are also written out and solved in the paper, and no load-bearing conclusion rests solely on a self-citation. The skeptic's concern--that the Fourier replacement grad -> i k drops the A^-1 metric factor in oblique propagation--is a correctness question about whether Eq. (34) follows from the stated equations, not a circularity. For the circularity pass, the derivation chain is self-contained and its quantitative outputs are not built into the input assumptions.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The derivation rests on the EBM governing equations from Velli et al. and Grappin et al., the polytropic closure, and a weak-expansion WKB ansatz. No new physical entities are introduced. The main load-bearing technical assumption is the Fourier replacement grad -> i k, which omits the A^{-1} factor in the EBM gradient.

free parameters (3)
  • Polytropic index profile gamma(R) = 3 models: gamma = 5/3 constant; gamma(R) decreasing to near 0 beyond about 20 AU (Livadiotis 2021); gamma = (2/3)(1…
    The fast-mode radial behavior and the predicted acceleration depend directly on the assumed gamma(R) profile. The profile is adopted from cited literature, not derived in this paper.
  • Initial Alfven-to-sound speed ratio v_A/v_S = 2
    Used to set the illustrative dispersion and phase-speed plots; not fitted to data.
  • Initial heliocentric distance R0 = 0.3 AU
    Used to normalize the radial coordinate in the figures; not fitted.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Ideal MHD closure with scalar pressure and polytropic index gamma, neglecting the Hall term
    Used in Eqs. (7)-(10); appropriate for long-wavelength solar wind dynamics but not universally valid.
  • domain assumption Expanding Box Model coordinate transformations and non-inertial terms (Eqs. 1-6)
    Adopted from Velli et al. [30] and Grappin et al. [31].
  • domain assumption Weak expansion limit with 1/tau much smaller than omega, allowing total derivatives to act as -i omega
    Section 3.2, paragraph 'In a weak expansion limit...'; validates the Fourier ansatz despite time-dependent background quantities.
  • ad hoc to paper Background magnetic field aligned with the radial expansion direction
    Eq. (32) sets B0 = (B0, 0, 0); this restricts the results to parallel field geometry and avoids Parker spiral rotation.
  • ad hoc to paper Neglect of the (a_dot/a) T dot u1 term in the momentum equation when forming Eq. (30)
    This term appears on the RHS of Eq. (24) but is absent from the wave equation Eq. (30); it can be justified only in the weak expansion limit and is not quantified.
  • ad hoc to paper Fourier replacement grad -> i k despite grad = A^{-1} grad' in the EBM equations
    Section 3.2, 'the operators grad and d/dt can be written as grad -> i k'; this ignores the A^{-1} factor in Eq. (4), affecting oblique propagation results.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The effect of plasma expansion on the dispersion properties of MHD waves." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GR2VG4HP

@misc{pith2026250608248,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The effect of plasma expansion on the dispersion properties of MHD waves},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GR2VG4HP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.08248}
}
abstract

In this work, we employ the set of ideal expanding magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) equations within the Expanding Box Model (EBM) framework to theoretically characterize the effects of radial solar wind expansion on its characteristic linear MHD waves. Through the analytical derivation of dispersion relations by a first-order expansion of the MHD-EBM equations, we explore the changes in wave propagation across a range of heliocentric distances on the linear magnetohydrodynamic modes: the Alfv\'en mode and the fast and slow magnetosonic modes, as obtained from the ideal MHD-EBM equations. Our findings reveal a spatial dependence in the derived dispersion relations that aligns with both the literature and the traditional ideal MHD case in the non-expanding limit, thereby helping to bridge the gap between theory and observation in solar wind dynamics. We observe a general decrease in wave frequencies as the plasma expands farther from the Sun. This decrease is reflected in the dispersion relations through the radial decrease of both the Alfv\'en and sound speeds, which decrease proportionally to $1/R$ and $1/R^{\gamma - 1}$, respectively, where $\gamma$ is the plasma polytropic index. The fast magnetosonic mode frequency and phase speed are significantly affected by the polytropic index value. We consider three models for the polytropic index evolution in the expanding solar wind: a constant (quasi-adiabatic) case, a radially decreasing profile in the outer heliosphere, and a model incorporating thermodynamic heating effects. Notably, we find that in the case of a decreasing polytropic index, the fast magnetosonic mode experiences an acceleration in the distant heliosphere, highlighting the significant influence of expansion on solar wind dynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.08248 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Cartesian approximation for a radially and spherically expanding plasma. The plasma box travels at a constant velocity V0, and is observed from a reference system S moving away at a distance R(t). The EBM introduces a non-inertial reference frame S ′ that moves along the plasma box at velocity V0. Renormalization of the transverse coordinates by the expansion parameter a(t) maintains the volume of the box constant. … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Propagation diagram for MHD waves in this scenario. Here, x is the radial direction from which the plasma expands at velocity V0. Thus, the background magnetic field is aligned with the direction of propagation, and the wave vector k traces an angle theta in the x-z plane to the direction of propagation. Nevertheless, this is a reasonable approximation for comparing the results with those existing in the literature … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (Top) Normalized dispersion relations for each mode with θ fixed at 0◦ , for different values of the R/R0 ratio. Here, R0 = 0.3 AU, and Ωp is the proton gyrofrequency. (Bottom) Normalized phase speeds of the waves for various θ values, as functions of heliocentric distance. wave; however, it decreases rapidly with heliocentric distance. This can be traced back directly to our theoretical result for the dispersion re… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (Top) Normalized dispersion relations for each mode with θ fixed at 0◦ . Here, R0 = 0.3AU, and Ωp is the proton gyrofrequency. (Bottom) Normalized phase speeds of the waves for various θ values, as functions of heliocentric distance. transverse directions. This directl…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Bruno R and Carbone V 2013 Living Reviews in Solar Physics10 ISSN 1614-4961 URL http: //dx.doi.org/10.12942/lrsp-2013-2

    doi:10.12942/lrsp-2013-2 2013

  2. [2]

    Marino R and Sorriso-Valvo L 2023 Physics Reports 1006 1–144 ISSN 0370-1573 URL http: //dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2022.12.001

    doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2022.12.001 2023

  3. [3]

    org/10.1086/149674

    Coleman Paul J J 1968 The Astrophysical Journal153 371 ISSN 1538-4357 URL http://dx.doi. org/10.1086/149674

    doi:10.1086/149674 1968

  4. [4]

    Marsch E, M¨ uhlh¨ auser K, Schwenn R, Rosenbauer H, Pilipp W and Neubauer F M 1982Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics87 52–72 ISSN 0148-0227 URL http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1029/JA087iA01p00052 The effect of plasma expansion on the dispersion properties of MHD waves 17

    doi:10.1029/ja087ia01p00052

  5. [5]

    Fox N J, Velli M C, Bale S D, Decker R, Driesman A, Howard R A, Kasper J C, Kinnison J, Kusterer M, Lario D, Lockwood M K, McComas D J, Raouafi N E and Szabo A 2015 Space Science Reviews 204 7–48 ISSN 1572-9672 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11214-015-0211-6

    doi:10.1007/s11214-015-0211-6 2015

  6. [6]

    M¨ uller D, St Cyr O C, Zouganelis I, Gilbert H R, Marsden R, Nieves-Chinchilla T, Antonucci E, Auch` ere F, Berghmans D, Horbury T S, Howard R A, Krucker S, Maksimovic M, Owen C J, Rochus P, Rodriguez-Pacheco J, Romoli M, Solanki S K, Bruno R, Carlsson M, Fludra A, Harra L, Hassler D M, Livi S, Louarn P, Peter H, Sch¨ uhle U, Teriaca L, del Toro Iniesta ...

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    Rivera Y J, Badman S T, Stevens M L, Verniero J L, Stawarz J E, Shi C, Raines J M, Paulson K W, Owen C J, Niembro T, Louarn P, Livi S A, Lepri S T, Kasper J C, Horbury T S, Halekas J S, Dewey R M, De Marco R and Bale S D 2024 Science 385 962–966 ISSN 1095-9203 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.adk6953

    doi:10.1126/science.adk6953 2024

  8. [8]

    Brodiano M, Dmitruk P and Andr´ es N 2023Physics of Plasmas30 032903 ISSN 1070-664X URL https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0109379

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0109379

Show all 50 references
  1. [9]

    Series A

    Chew G F, Goldberger M L, Low F E and Chandrasekhar S 1956 Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 236 112–118 ( Preprint https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rspa.1956.0116) URL https:// royalsocietypublishing.org...

    1956

  2. [10]

    com/doi/pdf/10.1029/2007GL030920) URL https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ doi/abs/10.1029/2007GL030920

    Matteini L, Landi S, Hellinger P, Pantellini F, Maksimovic M, Velli M, Goldstein B E and Marsch E 2007 Geophysical Research Letters34 (Preprint https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley. com/doi/pdf/10.1029/2007GL030920) URL https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ doi/abs/10.1029/2...

    2007 doi

  3. [11]

    Hellinger P and Tr´ avn ´ ıˇ cek P M 2011Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics 116 (Preprint https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029/2011JA016940) URL https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2011JA016940

    doi

  4. [12]

    Shi C, Velli M, Bale S D, R´ eville V, Maksimovi´ c M and Dakeyo J B 2022 Physics of Plasmas 29 122901 ISSN 1070-664X ( Preprint https://pubs.aip.org/aip/pop/article-pdf/doi/ 10.1063/5.0124703/16778711/122901_1_online.pdf) URL https://doi.org/10.1063/5. 0124703

    2022 doi

  5. [13]

    Dakeyo J B, Maksimovic M, D´ emoulin P, Halekas J and Stevens M L 2022 The Astrophysical Journal 940 130 URL https://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ac9b14

    2022 doi

  6. [14]

    Matthaeus W H and Velli M 2011 Space Science Reviews 160 145–168 ISSN 1572-9672 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11214-011-9793-9

    2011 doi

  7. [15]

    Fahr H J 2002 Annales Geophysicae 20 1509–1518 URL https://angeo.copernicus.org/ articles/20/1509/2002/

    2002

  8. [16]

    Zank G P, Adhikari L, Zhao L L, Mostafavi P, Zirnstein E J and McComas D J 2018 The Astrophysical Journal 869 23 URL https://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aaebfe

    2018 doi

  9. [17]

    Ofman L and Vi˜ nas A F 2007Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics112 ISSN 0148-0227 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2006JA012187

    doi

  10. [18]

    Ofman L, Vi˜ nas A F and Moya P S 2011Annales Geophysicae29 1071–1079 ISSN 1432-0576 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/angeo-29-1071-2011

    2011 doi

  11. [19]

    Moya P S, Navarro R, Vi˜ nas A F, Mu˜ noz V and Valdivia J A 2014The Astrophysical Journal781 76 URL https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/781/2/76

    doi

  12. [20]

    Belcher J W 1971 The Astrophysical Journal168 509 ISSN 1538-4357 URL http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1086/151105

    1971 doi

  13. [21]

    R´ eville V, Velli M, Panasenco O, Tenerani A, Shi C, Badman S T, Bale S D, Kasper J C, Stevens M L, Korreck K E, Bonnell J W, Case A W, de Wit T D, Goetz K, Harvey P R, Larson D E, Livi R, Malaspina D M, MacDowall R J, Pulupa M and Whittlesey P L 2020 The Astrophysical Journa...

    2020 doi

  14. [22]

    Tu C Y and Marsch E 1995 Space Science Reviews 73 1–210 ISSN 1572-9672 URL https: //doi.org/10.1007/BF00748891

    1995 doi

  15. [23]

    Chelpanov M, Anfinogentov S, Kostarev D, Mikhailova O, Rubtsov A, Fedenev V and Chelpanov A 2022 Solar-Terrestrial Physics 8(4) 3–27

    2022

  16. [24]

    Parker E 1965 Space Science Reviews 4 ISSN 1572-9672 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ BF00216273

    1965

  17. [25]

    Hollweg J V 1973 The Astrophysical Journal181 547 ISSN 1538-4357 URL http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1086/152072

    1973 doi

  18. [26]

    Barnes A and Hollweg J V 1974 Journal of Geophysical Research (1896-1977) 79 2302–2318 ( Preprint https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029/ JA079i016p02302) URL https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/ JA079i016p02302

    1974

  19. [27]

    Isenberg P A 1984 Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics89 6613–6622 (Preprint https: //agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029/JA089iA08p06613) URL https:// agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/JA089iA08p06613

    1984 doi

  20. [28]

    Hollweg J V 1990 Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics95 14873–14879 ISSN 0148-0227 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/JA095iA09p14873

    1990 doi

  21. [29]

    Vasquez B J and Hollweg J V 2004 Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics109 ISSN 0148-0227 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2003JA010105

    2004 doi

  22. [30]

    Velli M, Grappin R and Mangeney A 1992 Mhd turbulence in an expanding atmosphere AIP Conference Proceedingsvol 267 (AIP) p 154–159 ISSN 0094-243X URL http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1063/1.42861

    1992 doi

  23. [31]

    Grappin R, Velli M and Mangeney A 1993 Physical Review Letters70 2190–2193 ISSN 0031-9007 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.70.2190

    1993 doi

  24. [32]

    Grappin R and Velli M 1996 Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics101 425–444 ISSN 0148-0227 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/95JA02147

    1996 doi

  25. [33]

    Innocenti M E, Tenerani A and Velli M 2019 The Astrophysical Journal 870 66 URL https: //dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aaf1be

    2019 doi

  26. [34]

    Innocenti M E, Boella E, Tenerani A and Velli M 2020 The Astrophysical Journal Letters898 L41 URL https://dx.doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/aba591

    2020 doi

  27. [35]

    Micera A, Zhukov A N, L´ opez R A, Innocenti M E, Lazar M, Boella E and Lapenta G 2020 The Astrophysical Journal Letters 903 L23 ISSN 2041-8213 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/ 2041-8213/abc0e8

    2020

  28. [36]

    Echeverr ´ ıa-Veas S, Moya P S, Lazar M, Poedts S and Asenjo F A 2024The Astrophysical Journal 975 112 URL https://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ad7949

    doi

  29. [37]

    Liewer P C, Velli M and Goldstein B E 2001 Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics106 29261–29281 ISSN 0148-0227 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2001JA000086

    2001 doi

  30. [38]

    Moya P S, Vi˜ nas A F, Mu˜ noz V and Valdivia J A 2012Annales Geophysicae 30 1361–1369 URL https://angeo.copernicus.org/articles/30/1361/2012/

    2012

  31. [39]

    Tenerani A and Velli M 2017 The Astrophysical Journal 843 26 ISSN 1538-4357 URL http: //dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/aa71b9

    2017 doi

  32. [40]

    Seough J, Yoon P H, Nariyuki Y and Salem C 2023 The Astrophysical Journal 953 8 URL https://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/acde7d

    2023 doi

  33. [41]

    Nariyuki Y 2015 Physics of Plasmas 22 ISSN 1089-7674 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1. 4908544

    2015 doi

  34. [42]

    Shi C, Velli M, Tenerani A, Rappazzo F and R´ eville V 2020 The Astrophysical Journal 888 68 ISSN 1538-4357 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ab5fce

    2020 doi

  35. [43]

    Echeverr ´ ıa-Veas S, Moya P S, Lazar M and Poedts S 2023 Universe 9 448 ISSN 2218-1997 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/universe9100448

    2023 doi

  36. [44]

    Alfv´ en H 1942Nature 150 405–406 ISSN 1476-4687 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/150405d0 The effect of plasma expansion on the dispersion properties of MHD waves 19

    doi

  37. [45]

    Adrian M L, Vi˜ nas A F, Moya P S and Wendel D E 2016The Astrophysical Journal833 49 URL https://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/833/1/49

    doi

  38. [46]

    Livadiotis G and McComas D J 2023 The Astrophysical Journal 956 88 ISSN 1538-4357 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/acf45d

    2023 doi

  39. [47]

    3847/2515-5172/abd7fc

    Livadiotis G 2021 Research Notes of the AAS5 4 ISSN 2515-5172 URL http://dx.doi.org/10. 3847/2515-5172/abd7fc

    2021

  40. [48]

    Nicolaou G, Livadiotis G, Wicks R T, Verscharen D and Maruca B A 2020 The Astrophysical Journal 901 26 ISSN 1538-4357 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/abaaae

    2020 doi

  41. [49]

    Elliott H A, McComas D J, Zirnstein E J, Randol B M, Delamere P A, Livadiotis G, Bagenal F, Barnes N P, Stern S A, Young L A, Olkin C B, Spencer J, Weaver H A, Ennico K, Gladstone G R and Smith C W 2019 The Astrophysical Journal885 156 ISSN 1538-4357 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.3...

    2019 doi

  42. [50]

    Batchelor G K 2000 An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics (Cambridge University Press) ISBN 9780511800955 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511800955

    2000 doi

Pith tools

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