pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.28614 · v1 · pith:WVDKH6HDnew · submitted 2026-06-26 · ⚛️ physics.space-ph · astro-ph.SR

Wave Activity at MHD-ion Scales Associated with Switchbacks

Kyung-Eun Choi , Oleksiy V. Agapitov , Forrest Mozer , Seung-Ju Yang , Dae-Young Lee , Richard D. Sydora , Lucas Colomban , Liudmyla Kozak
show 4 more authors
Mingzhe Liu Marc Pulupa Jia Huang Shaosui Xu
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-30 00:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.space-ph astro-ph.SR
keywords magnetic switchbackssolar windion-scale wavestransverse magnetic powerParker Solar Probeplasma heatingMHD-ion scalesturbulence cascade
0
0 comments X

The pith

Transverse magnetic power is intrinsically enhanced inside solar wind switchbacks even at small deflection angles.

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

The paper tests whether apparent increases in wave activity inside magnetic switchbacks arise from how spacecraft sample the tilted field or from real physical amplification inside the structures. By separating magnetic fluctuations into transverse and field-aligned parts and comparing switchback and non-switchback intervals that share the same local field angle, the work isolates an excess in transverse power that persists across small, intermediate, and large rotations. This excess occurs together with higher proton temperatures and stronger electric-field fluctuations while the inertial-range spectral slope stays unchanged. The findings indicate that switchbacks function as localized regions of cross-scale energy transfer and ion-scale dissipation in the young solar wind.

Core claim

Decomposing fluctuations into field-aligned and transverse components and matching intervals by local magnetic field angle θ reveals that transverse magnetic power δB⊥ is systematically higher inside switchbacks than outside across a wide range of θ. The enhancement remains even where geometric projection predicts little extra power. Inertial-range spectral indices are similar inside and outside switchbacks, proton temperatures are elevated, and electric-field fluctuations increase, pointing to intrinsic wave amplification and dissipation rather than sampling effects alone.

What carries the argument

Comparison of transverse magnetic power δB⊥ inside versus outside switchbacks at matched local magnetic field angles θ in the 0.1–3 f_cp frequency band.

If this is right

  • The turbulence cascade proceeds with similar spectral indices inside and outside switchbacks despite added wave power.
  • Switchbacks serve as localized sites of ion-scale wave activity and cross-scale energy transfer.
  • Elevated proton temperatures and electric fluctuations accompany the magnetic power increase inside switchbacks.
  • The enhancement appears for both small and large field deflections, extending beyond projection geometry.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Solar wind heating models may need to treat switchbacks as distinct patches with elevated dissipation rates at ion scales.
  • Observations farther from the Sun could check whether the intrinsic excess power changes with radial distance.
  • Deflection-triggered instabilities offer one possible mechanism for generating the extra transverse power.

Load-bearing premise

Comparing switchback and non-switchback intervals at the same local magnetic field angle removes geometric sampling effects without leaving other uncontrolled differences in plasma conditions or interval selection.

What would settle it

A study that selects intervals at identical θ distributions but finds no excess transverse magnetic power inside switchbacks would falsify the claim of intrinsic enhancement.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.28614 by Dae-Young Lee, Forrest Mozer, Jia Huang, Kyung-Eun Choi, Liudmyla Kozak, Lucas Colomban, Marc Pulupa, Mingzhe Liu, Oleksiy V. Agapitov, Richard D. Sydora, Seung-Ju Yang, Shaosui Xu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Representative SB intervals observed by PSP at two heliocentric distances. The left column shows an event at 37.2 RS(Nov. 4, 2018; E01), and the right column shows an event at 11.8 RS(Dec. 29, 2023; E18). Panels (a,j) show the magnetic field components in RTN coordinates (black: magnitude, red: R, green: T, and blue: N), and panels (b,k) show the corresponding plasma bulk velocity components (the radial co… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Field-aligned wave activity associated with representative SB intervals shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Statistical distribution of band-integrated magnetic wave power as a function of the local field angle θ for E01 (35–50 RS) and encounters E17–21 at two heliocentric distance ranges (35–50 RS and 11–35 RS). The three column groups correspond to E01 (panels a1-a9), E17–21 at 35–50 RS (panels b1-b9), and E17–21 at 11–35 RS (panels c1-c9); within each group, the three columns show all solar-wind intervals (le… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Radial dependence of the occurrence rate of SB intervals as a function of the transverse MHD-band wave power normalized by |B|. Panel (a) shows SBs identified from the event list, and panel (b) shows SBs identified from the θ-based threshold method. In each panel, colors indicate the SB occurrence rate in the plane of heliocentric distance RS and transverse MHD-band wave power, and gray bins denote regions… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Spectral index of magnetic fluctuations as a function of the local field angle θ during E01. The upper panels (a-f) show the distribution for non-SB intervals, and the lower panels (g-l) show the corresponding results for SB intervals. Black symbols correspond to non-SB intervals and red symbols to SB intervals. Panels (a-c) and (g-i) present the RTN components (BR, BT , BN ), while panels (d-f) and (j-l) … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Same format as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Magnetic switchbacks (SB) -- the localized magnetic structures with magnetic field direction inclined at an angle $\theta$ relative to the background $B_0$ -- in the young solar wind have been associated with enhanced ion-scale wave activity and local plasma heating. It remains debated whether the apparent wave-power increase is intrinsic or mainly caused by sampling geometry. In this work, we analyze magnetic and electric field fluctuations measured by Parker Solar Probe, focusing on the 0.1--3~\(f_{cp}\) frequency band that spans the transition from the MHD inertial range to ion-kinetic scales. By decomposing magnetic fluctuations into field-aligned and transverse components and comparing SB and non-SB intervals at the same local magnetic field angle, we test whether SBs sample an anisotropic cascade from different viewing angles or host intrinsically amplified wave activity. We find that the transverse magnetic power $\delta B_{\perp}$ is systematically enhanced inside switchbacks across a wide range of magnetic field rotation angles $\theta$. The enhancement persists even at small and intermediate deflections, where geometric projection alone predicts weak power, indicating an intrinsic origin beyond sampling geometry. The inertial-range spectral indices also remain similar between SB and non-SB intervals despite the enhanced wave power inside SBs, suggesting that the underlying turbulence cascade is largely preserved. This excess $\delta B_{\perp}$ coincides with elevated proton temperatures and enhanced electric-field fluctuations, supporting the interpretation that SBs act as localized sites of cross-scale energy transfer and ion-scale dissipation in the near-Sun solar wind.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes Parker Solar Probe magnetic and electric field data in the 0.1-3 f_cp band. It decomposes fluctuations into field-aligned and transverse components and compares switchback (SB) and non-SB intervals matched at the same local magnetic field angle θ. The central claim is that transverse magnetic power δB⊥ is systematically enhanced inside SBs across a wide range of θ (including small and intermediate angles where geometric projection predicts weak power), indicating an intrinsic origin. Inertial-range spectral indices remain similar between SB and non-SB intervals, and the excess δB⊥ coincides with elevated proton temperatures and enhanced electric-field fluctuations, interpreted as evidence that SBs are localized sites of cross-scale energy transfer and ion-scale dissipation.

Significance. If the θ-matched comparison adequately isolates geometry from other effects, the result would strengthen the case that switchbacks host intrinsically amplified wave activity at MHD-ion scales and contribute to solar-wind heating. The persistence of the δB⊥ excess at small θ is a direct test of the geometry hypothesis and, if confirmed with full controls, would be a useful observational constraint on turbulence models. The similarity of spectral indices despite the power enhancement is also noteworthy as it suggests the underlying cascade is preserved.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract (method description): The central claim that the observed δB⊥ enhancement is intrinsic rests on the assertion that 'comparing SB and non-SB intervals at the same local magnetic field angle' sufficiently controls for sampling geometry. However, the manuscript provides no information on whether SB and non-SB samples are also matched or statistically equivalent in other properties such as plasma β, density variance, proton temperature, solar-wind speed, or interval duration. Without these controls, the residual δB⊥ difference could arise from systematic differences in plasma conditions rather than an intrinsic switchback property, directly undermining the interpretation that the excess at small θ indicates an intrinsic origin.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would benefit from a brief statement of the number of intervals analyzed, the θ range covered, and whether error bars or significance tests accompany the reported power enhancement.
  2. [Abstract] Notation for the frequency band (0.1--3 f_cp) and the decomposition into δB⊥ should be defined at first use for clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments. The major comment raises a valid point about additional controls, which we will address through revision.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (method description): The central claim that the observed δB⊥ enhancement is intrinsic rests on the assertion that 'comparing SB and non-SB intervals at the same local magnetic field angle' sufficiently controls for sampling geometry. However, the manuscript provides no information on whether SB and non-SB samples are also matched or statistically equivalent in other properties such as plasma β, density variance, proton temperature, solar-wind speed, or interval duration. Without these controls, the residual δB⊥ difference could arise from systematic differences in plasma conditions rather than an intrinsic switchback property, directly undermining the interpretation that the excess at small θ indicates an intrinsic origin.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript does not explicitly demonstrate or report matching of SB and non-SB intervals on plasma parameters beyond θ. This is a legitimate concern, as unaccounted differences in β, density variance, or other conditions could contribute to the observed δB⊥ excess. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection (or appendix) presenting the statistical distributions and mean values of plasma β, density variance, proton temperature, solar-wind speed, and interval durations for the θ-matched samples. We will also include a supplementary check confirming that the δB⊥ enhancement at small and intermediate θ remains statistically significant after restricting to subsets with closely matched plasma parameters. These additions will directly address the referee’s point and strengthen the intrinsic-origin interpretation. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct observational comparison with no derivation chain

full rationale

The paper reports an empirical finding from Parker Solar Probe data: transverse magnetic power is higher inside switchbacks than non-switchbacks when intervals are matched on local field angle θ. No equations, models, or derivations are presented that reduce the result to a fitted parameter, self-definition, or self-citation chain. The comparison is a straightforward data partitioning and spectral analysis; the result is not forced by construction from the inputs. External validity concerns (possible unmatched confounders) are separate from circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis relies on established techniques in magnetohydrodynamics and plasma physics without introducing new free parameters or entities.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Fluctuations in the 0.1-3 f_cp band represent the transition from MHD to ion-kinetic scales in solar wind turbulence.
    This is a standard frequency range used in space plasma studies.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5856 in / 1301 out tokens · 51132 ms · 2026-06-30T00:28:10.387013+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    V ., Drake, J

    Agapitov, O. V ., Drake, J. F., Swisdak, M., Choi, K.-E., & Raouafi, N. 2023, Constraints on the Alfv´enicity of Switchbacks, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 959, L21, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad12a5

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad12a5 2023

  2. [2]

    V ., Drake, J

    Agapitov, O. V ., Drake, J. F., Swisdak, M., et al. 2022, Flux rope merging and the structure of switchbacks in the solar wind, The Astrophysical Journal

    2022

  3. [3]

    V ., Wit, T

    Agapitov, O. V ., Wit, T. D. D., Mozer, F. S., et al. 2020, Sunward-propagating Whistler Waves Collocated with Localized Magnetic Field Holes in the Solar Wind: Parker Solar Probe Observations at 35.7 R⊙ Radii, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 891, L20, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab799c

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab799c 2020

  4. [4]

    T., Fargette, N., Matteini, L., Agapitov, O

    Badman, S. T., Fargette, N., Matteini, L., Agapitov, O. V ., et al. 2026, Properties of Magnetic Switchbacks in the Near-Sun Solar Wind, in Space Science Reviews (Springer) 12 CHOI ET AL

    2026

  5. [5]

    Bale, S., Kasper, J., Howes, G., et al. 2009, Magnetic Fluctuation Power Near Proton Temperature Anisotropy Instability Thresholds¡? format?¿ in the Solar Wind, Physical review letters, 103, 211101, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.211101

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.103.211101 2009

  6. [6]

    Bale, S., Goetz, K., Harvey, P., et al. 2016, The FIELDS instrument suite for Solar Probe Plus: measuring the coronal plasma and magnetic field, plasma waves and turbulence, and radio signatures of solar transients, Space Science Reviews, 204, 49, doi: 10.1007/s11214-016-0244-5

    work page doi:10.1007/s11214-016-0244-5 2016

  7. [7]

    2019, Highly structured slow solar wind emerging from an equatorial coronal hole, Nature, 576, 237, doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1818-7

    Bale, S., Badman, S., Bonnell, J., et al. 2019, Highly structured slow solar wind emerging from an equatorial coronal hole, Nature, 576, 237, doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1818-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1818-7 2019

  8. [8]

    Bandyopadhyay, R., Goldstein, M., Maruca, B., et al. 2020, Enhanced energy transfer rate in solar wind turbulence observed near the sun from parker solar probe, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 246, 48, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab5dae

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab5dae 2020

  9. [9]

    A., Mallet, A., Huang, J., et al

    Bowen, T. A., Mallet, A., Huang, J., et al. 2020a, Ion-scale Electromagnetic Waves in the Inner Heliosphere, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 246, 66, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab6c65

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab6c65

  10. [10]

    A., Mallet, A., Bale, S

    Bowen, T. A., Mallet, A., Bale, S. D., et al. 2020b, Constraining ion-scale heating and spectral energy transfer in observations of plasma turbulence, Physical review letters, 125, 025102, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.025102

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.125.025102

  11. [11]

    2019, The low-frequency break observed in the slow solar wind magnetic spectra, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 627, A96, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935841

    Bruno, R., Telloni, D., Sorriso-Valvo, L., et al. 2019, The low-frequency break observed in the slow solar wind magnetic spectra, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 627, A96, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201935841

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201935841 2019

  12. [12]

    W., Kasper, J

    Case, A. W., Kasper, J. C., Stevens, M. L., et al. 2020, The solar probe cup on the Parker Solar Probe, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 246, 43, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab5a7b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab5a7b 2020

  13. [13]

    2021, Modeling Interactions of Narrowband Large Amplitude Whistler-mode Waves with Electrons in the Solar Wind inside∼0.3 au and at 1 au Using a Particle Tracing

    Cattell, C., & V o, T. 2021, Modeling Interactions of Narrowband Large Amplitude Whistler-mode Waves with Electrons in the Solar Wind inside∼0.3 au and at 1 au Using a Particle Tracing

    2021

  14. [14]

    Code, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 914, L33, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac08a1

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac08a1 2041

  15. [15]

    2014, Ion-scale spectral break of solar wind turbulence at high and low beta, Geophysical Research Letters, 41, 8081, doi: 10.1002/2014GL062009

    Chen, C., Leung, L., Boldyrev, S., Maruca, B., & Bale, S. 2014, Ion-scale spectral break of solar wind turbulence at high and low beta, Geophysical Research Letters, 41, 8081, doi: 10.1002/2014GL062009

    work page doi:10.1002/2014gl062009 2014

  16. [16]

    2020, The evolution and role of solar wind turbulence in the inner heliosphere, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 246, 53, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab60a3

    Chen, C., Bale, S., Bonnell, J., et al. 2020, The evolution and role of solar wind turbulence in the inner heliosphere, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 246, 53, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab60a3

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab60a3 2020

  17. [17]

    Choi, K.-E., Agapitov, O., Colomban, L., et al. 2024a, Whistler waves in the young solar wind: statistics of amplitude and propagation direction from Parker Solar Probe encounters 1–11, The Astrophysical Journal, 971, 177, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad54c4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad54c4

  18. [18]

    2025a, Surface Waves at Switchback Boundaries in the Young Solar Wind from Parker Solar Probe Observations, The Astrophysical Journal, 992, 208, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0b65

    Colomban, L. 2025a, Surface Waves at Switchback Boundaries in the Young Solar Wind from Parker Solar Probe Observations, The Astrophysical Journal, 992, 208, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae0b65

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae0b65

  19. [19]

    V ., Lee, D.-Y ., et al

    Choi, K.-E., Agapitov, O. V ., Lee, D.-Y ., et al. 2025b, Switchbacks near Boundaries of Small-scale Magnetic Flux Ropes in the Young Solar Wind from Parker Solar Probe Observations, The Astrophysical Journal, 988, 49, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ade4be

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ade4be

  20. [20]

    Observations, The Astrophysical Journal, 961, 3, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad02f6

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad02f6

  21. [21]

    Colomban, L., Kretzschmar, M., Krasnoselkikh, V ., et al. 2024, Quantifying the diffusion of suprathermal electrons by whistler waves between 0.2 and 1 AU with Solar Orbiter and Parker Solar Probe, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 684, A143, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202347489

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202347489 2024

  22. [22]

    2004, Large-scale magnetic field inversions at sector boundaries, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 109, doi: 10.1029/2003JA010278

    Crooker, N., Kahler, S., Larson, D., & Lin, R. 2004, Large-scale magnetic field inversions at sector boundaries, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 109, doi: 10.1029/2003JA010278

    work page doi:10.1029/2003ja010278 2004

  23. [23]

    A., et al

    Duan, D., He, J., Bowen, T. A., et al. 2021, Anisotropy of solar wind turbulence in the inner heliosphere at kinetic scales: PSP observations, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 915, L8, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac07ac Dudok de Wit, T., Krasnoselskikh, V . V ., Bale, S. D., et al. 2020, Switchbacks in the near-Sun magnetic field: long memory and impact on t...

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac07ac 2021

  24. [24]

    2025, The impact of Alfvenic shear flow on magnetic reconnection and turbulence, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 992, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae0b56

    Ervin, T., Mallet, A., Eriksson, S., et al. 2025, The impact of Alfvenic shear flow on magnetic reconnection and turbulence, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 992, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae0b56

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae0b56 2025

  25. [25]

    P., et al

    Fargette, N., Lavraud, B., Rouillard, A. P., et al. 2022, The preferential orientation of magnetic switchbacks and its implications for solar magnetic flux transport, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 663, A109, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243537

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243537 2022

  26. [26]

    M., MacDowall, R

    Farrell, W. M., MacDowall, R. J., Gruesbeck, J. R., et al. 2020, Magnetic field dropouts at near-sun switchback boundaries: A superposed epoch analysis, The Astrophysical Journal

    2020

  27. [27]

    2006, The common spectrum for accelerated ions in the quiet-time solar wind, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 640, L79, doi: 10.1086/503293

    Fisk, L., & Gloeckler, G. 2006, The common spectrum for accelerated ions in the quiet-time solar wind, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 640, L79, doi: 10.1086/503293

    work page doi:10.1086/503293 2006

  28. [28]

    Franci, L., Landi, S., Matteini, L., Verdini, A., & Hellinger, P. 2015, High-resolution hybrid simulations of kinetic plasma turbulence at proton scales, The Astrophysical Journal, 812, 21, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/812/1/21 WAVE ACTIVITY ASSOCIATED WITHSWITCHBACKS13

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/812/1/21 2015

  29. [29]

    Froment, C., Agapitov, O., Krasnoselskikh, V ., et al. 2023, Whistler waves generated inside magnetic dips in the young solar wind: Observations of the search-coil magnetometer on board Parker Solar Probe, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 672, A135

    2023

  30. [30]

    He, J., Marsch, E., Tu, C., Yao, S., & Tian, H. 2011, Possible evidence of Alfv´en-cyclotron waves in the angle distribution of magnetic helicity of solar wind turbulence, The Astrophysical Journal, 731, 85, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/731/2/85

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/731/2/85 2011

  31. [31]

    2018, Short, large-amplitude speed enhancements in the near-Sunfast solar wind, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 478, 1980, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty953

    Horbury, T., Matteini, L., & Stansby, D. 2018, Short, large-amplitude speed enhancements in the near-Sunfast solar wind, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 478, 1980, doi: 10.1093/mnras/sty953

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/sty953 2018

  32. [32]

    S., Woolley, T., Laker, R., et al

    Horbury, T. S., Woolley, T., Laker, R., et al. 2020, Sharp Alfv´enic Impulses in the Near-Sun Solar Wind, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 246, 45, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab5b15

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab5b15 2020

  33. [33]

    C., Larson, D

    Huang, J., Kasper, J. C., Larson, D. E., et al. 2023, The

    2023

  34. [34]

    2025, Two Types of 1/f Range in Solar Wind Turbulence, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 990, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adfa13

    Huang, Z., Velli, M., Chandran, B., et al. 2025, Two Types of 1/f Range in Solar Wind Turbulence, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 990, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adfa13

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adfa13 2025

  35. [35]

    1963, Turbulence of a conducting fluid in a strong magnetic field, Astronomicheskii Zhurnal, 40, 742

    Iroshnikov, P. 1963, Turbulence of a conducting fluid in a strong magnetic field, Astronomicheskii Zhurnal, 40, 742

    1963

  36. [36]

    K., Raouafi, N

    Jagarlamudi, V . K., Raouafi, N. E., Bourouaine, S., et al. 2023, Occurrence and Evolution of Switchbacks in the Inner Heliosphere: Parker Solar Probe Observations, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 950, L7, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/acd778

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acd778 2023

  37. [37]

    K., Russell, C

    Jian, L. K., Russell, C. T., Luhmann, J. G., et al. 2009, Ion cyclotron waves in the solar wind observed by STEREO near 1

    2009

  38. [38]

    AU, The Astrophysical Journal, 701, L105, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/701/2/L105

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/701/2/l105

  39. [39]

    Kahler, S., & Lin, R. 1994, The determination of interplanetary magnetic field polarities around sector boundaries using E¿ 2 keV electrons, Geophysical Research Letters, 21, 1575, doi: 10.1029/94GL01362

    work page doi:10.1029/94gl01362 1994

  40. [40]

    Karbashewski, S., Agapitov, O., Kim, H., et al. 2023, Whistler wave observations by Parker Solar Probe during encounter 1: Counter-propagating whistlers collocated with magnetic field inhomogeneities and their application to electric field measurement calibration, The Astrophysical Journal, 947, 73

    2023

  41. [41]

    C., Abiad, R., Austin, G., et al

    Kasper, J. C., Abiad, R., Austin, G., et al. 2016, Solar wind electrons alphas and protons (SWEAP) investigation: Design of the solar wind and coronal plasma instrument suite for solar probe plus, Space Science Reviews, 204, 131, doi: 10.1007/s11214-015-0206-3

    work page doi:10.1007/s11214-015-0206-3 2016

  42. [42]

    C., Bale, S

    Kasper, J. C., Bale, S. D., Belcher, J. W., et al. 2019, Alfv´enic velocity spikes and rotational flows in the near-Sun solar wind, Nature, 576, 228, doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1813-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1813-z 2019

  43. [43]

    C., Klein, K

    Kasper, J. C., Klein, K. G., Lichko, E., et al. 2021, Parker Solar Probe Enters the Magnetically Dominated Solar Corona, PhRvL, 127, 255101, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.255101

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.127.255101 2021

  44. [44]

    Kraichnan, R. H. 1965, Inertial-range spectrum of hydromagnetic turbulence, Physics of Fluids, 8, 1385, doi: 10.1063/1.1761412

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1761412 1965

  45. [45]

    2020, Localized magnetic-field structures and their boundaries in the near-sun solar wind from parker solar probe measurements, The Astrophysical Journal

    Krasnoselskikh, V ., Larosa, A., Agapitov, O., et al. 2020, Localized magnetic-field structures and their boundaries in the near-sun solar wind from parker solar probe measurements, The Astrophysical Journal

    2020

  46. [46]

    S., Woodham, L

    Laker, R., Horbury, T. S., Woodham, L. D., et al. 2024, Coherent deflection pattern and associated temperature enhancements in the near-Sun solar wind, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

    2024

  47. [47]

    2021, Switchbacks: statistical properties and deviations from Alfv´enicity, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 650, A3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039442

    Larosa, A., Krasnoselskikh, V ., Dudok De Wit, T., et al. 2021, Switchbacks: statistical properties and deviations from Alfv´enicity, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 650, A3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039442

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039442 2021

  48. [48]

    Lee, D.-Y ., Choi, D., Choi, K.-E., & Noh, S. 2026, Multiple magnetic flux ropes within reconnection exhausts close to the centers of heliospheric current sheets near the Sun, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 709, A189, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202659246

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202659246 2026

  49. [49]

    2021, Solar wind energy flux observations in the inner heliosphere: first results from Parker Solar Probe, A&A, 650, A14, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039615

    Liu, M., Issautier, K., Meyer-Vernet, N., et al. 2021, Solar wind energy flux observations in the inner heliosphere: first results from Parker Solar Probe, A&A, 650, A14, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039615

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039615 2021

  50. [50]

    Liu, M., Issautier, K., Moncuquet, M., et al. 2023, Total electron temperature derived from quasi-thermal noise spectroscopy in the pristine solar wind from Parker Solar Probe observations, A&A, 674, A49, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202245450

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202245450 2023

  51. [51]

    W., Larson, D

    Liu, M., Bonnell, J. W., Larson, D. E., et al. 2025, High-Frequency Solar Wind Electron Density Measurements Derived from Spacecraft Surface Charging Method on Parker Solar Probe, in AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, American Geophysical Union, SH43D–2620

    2025

  52. [52]

    E., Kasper, J

    Livi, R., Larson, D. E., Kasper, J. C., et al. 2022, The solar probe analyzer—ions on the Parker Solar Probe, The Astrophysical Journal, 938, 138, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac93f5

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac93f5 2022

  53. [53]

    2023, Statistical Study of Anisotropic Proton Heating in Interplanetary Magnetic Switchbacks Measured by Parker Solar Probe, The Astrophysical Journal

    Luo, Q., Duan, D., He, J., Zhu, X., et al. 2023, Statistical Study of Anisotropic Proton Heating in Interplanetary Magnetic Switchbacks Measured by Parker Solar Probe, The Astrophysical Journal

    2023

  54. [54]

    D., Bowen, T., & Bale, S

    Mallet, A., Squire, J., Chandran, B. D., Bowen, T., & Bale, S. D. 2021, Evolution of large-amplitude Alfv´en waves and generation of switchbacks in the expanding solar wind, The Astrophysical Journal, 918, 62, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac0c12 Martinovi´c, M. M., Klein, K. G., Huang, J., et al. 2021, Multiscale solar wind turbulence properties inside and near...

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac0c12 2021

  55. [55]

    Moncuquet, M., Meyer-Vernet, N., Issautier, K., et al. 2020, First In Situ Measurements of Electron Density and Temperature from Quasi-thermal Noise Spectroscopy with Parker Solar Probe/FIELDS, ApJS, 246, 44, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab5a84

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab5a84 2020

  56. [56]

    Direct Evidence of Non-Ideal Dissipative Dynamics in Solar Wind Magnetic Switchbacks

    Mozer, F., Agapitov, O., Choi, K.-E., & Sydora, R. 2026, Direct Evidence of Non-Ideal Dissipative Dynamics in Solar Wind Magnetic Switchbacks, arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.14114, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2605.14114

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.14114 2026

  57. [57]

    S., Agapitov, O

    Mozer, F. S., Agapitov, O. V ., Bale, S. D., et al. 2020, Switchbacks in the solar magnetic field: Their evolution, their content, and their effects on the plasma, The Astrophysical Journal

    2020

  58. [58]

    Owens, M., Crooker, N., & Lockwood, M. 2013, Solar origin of heliospheric magnetic field inversions: Evidence for coronal loop opening within pseudostreamers, Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 118, 1868, doi: 10.1002/jgra.50259

    work page doi:10.1002/jgra.50259 2013

  59. [59]

    E., Matteini, L., Squire, J., Badman, S

    Raouafi, N. E., Matteini, L., Squire, J., Badman, S. T., et al. 2023, Parker solar probe: Four years of discoveries at solar cycle minimum, in Space Science Reviews (Springer)

    2023

  60. [60]

    P., Farrell, W

    Rasca, A. P., Farrell, W. M., MacDowall, R. J., et al. 2021, Near-Sun Switchback Boundaries: Dissipation with Solar

    2021

  61. [61]

    2022, Patches of magnetic switchbacks and their origins, The Astrophysical Journal

    Shi, C., Panasenco, O., Velli, M., Tenerani, A., et al. 2022, Patches of magnetic switchbacks and their origins, The Astrophysical Journal

    2022

  62. [62]

    Squire, J., Chandran, B. D. G., & Meyrand, R. 2020, In-situ Switchback Formation in the Expanding Solar Wind, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 891, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab74e1

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab74e1 2020

  63. [63]

    D., Malaspina, D

    Tatum, P. D., Malaspina, D. M., Chasapis, A., & Short, B. 2024, The independence of magnetic turbulent power spectra to the presence of switchbacks in the inner heliosphere, The Astrophysical Journal, 973, 156, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7115

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad7115 2024

  64. [64]

    2021, Evolution of switchbacks in the inner heliosphere, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 919, L31, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac2606

    Tenerani, A., Sioulas, N., Matteini, L., et al. 2021, Evolution of switchbacks in the inner heliosphere, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 919, L31, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac2606

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac2606 2021

  65. [65]

    L., Larson, D

    Verniero, J. L., Larson, D. E., Livi, R., et al. 2020, Parker Solar Probe Observations of Proton Beams Simultaneous with Ion-scale Waves, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 248, 5, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab86af V o, T., Agapitov, O. V ., Choi, K.-E., et al. 2024, Enhanced efficiency of solar wind electron interaction with whistlers caused by swi...

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab86af 2020

  66. [66]

    L., Larson, D

    Whittlesey, P. L., Larson, D. E., Kasper, J. C., et al. 2020, The Solar Probe ANalyzers—Electrons on the Parker Solar Probe, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 246, 74, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ab7370

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab7370 2020

  67. [67]

    D., Horbury, T

    Woodham, L. D., Horbury, T. S., Matteini, L., et al. 2021, Enhanced proton parallel temperature inside patches of switchbacks in the inner heliosphere, Astronomy & Astrophysics

    2021

  68. [68]

    S., et al

    Woolley, T., Matteini, L., Horbury, T. S., et al. 2020, Proton core behaviour inside magnetic field switchbacks, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

    2020

  69. [69]

    D., et al

    Woolley, T., Matteini, L., McManus, M. D., et al. 2021, Plasma properties, switchback patches, and lowα-particle abundance in slow Alfv´enic coronal hole wind at 0.13 au, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 508, 236, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stab2281

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stab2281 2021

  70. [70]

    F., Squire, J., Pariat, E., et al

    Wyper, P. F., Squire, J., Pariat, E., et al. 2026, Magnetic switchback formation: a review of proposed mechanisms, Space Science Reviews, 222, 43

    2026

  71. [71]

    2020, The origin of switchbacks in the solar corona: Linear theory, The Astrophysical Journal, 903, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abb828

    Zank, G., Nakanotani, M., Zhao, L.-L., Adhikari, L., & Kasper, J. 2020, The origin of switchbacks in the solar corona: Linear theory, The Astrophysical Journal, 903, 1, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abb828

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abb828 2020

  72. [72]

    Q., Yan, H., Liu, T

    Zhao, S. Q., Yan, H., Liu, T. Z., Liu, M., & Shi, M. 2021, Analysis of Magnetohydrodynamic Perturbations in the Radial-field Solar Wind from Parker Solar Probe Observations, ApJ, 923, 253, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac2ffe

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac2ffe 2021