Physics of Weibel-mediated relativistic collisionless shocks

A. Vanthieghem (IAP); G. Pelletier (IPAG); L. Gremillet (CEA); M. Lemoine (IAP)

arxiv: 1907.07595 · v2 · pith:XI4JPNYAnew · submitted 2019-07-17 · 🌌 astro-ph.HE · physics.plasm-ph

Physics of Weibel-mediated relativistic collisionless shocks

M. Lemoine (IAP) , L. Gremillet (CEA) , G. Pelletier (IPAG) , A. Vanthieghem (IAP) This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 20:08 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.HE physics.plasm-ph

keywords relativistic collisionless shockscurrent filamentation instabilityWeibel instabilitypair plasmasPIC simulationselectromagnetic turbulencenoninertial frameplasma heating

0 comments

The pith

A model traces how current filamentation instability mediates relativistic collisionless pair shocks through a magnetic noninertial frame.

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

This paper constructs a theoretical model for relativistic collisionless shocks in pair plasmas driven by the current filamentation instability. It identifies a noninertial frame where the instability operates mostly through magnetic fields. In that frame the model follows the incoming plasma as it decelerates and heats via collisionless scattering off the electromagnetic turbulence. The resulting description reproduces the main features seen in large-scale 2D3V particle-in-cell simulations. The work supplies a microscopic account of energy transfer inside such shocks.

Core claim

We develop a comprehensive theoretical model of relativistic collisionless pair shocks mediated by the current filamentation instability. We notably characterize the noninertial frame in which this instability is of a mostly magnetic nature, and describe at a microscopic level the deceleration and heating of the incoming background plasma through its collisionless interaction with the electromagnetic turbulence. Our model compares well to large-scale 2D3V PIC simulations, and provides an important touchstone for the phenomenology of such plasma systems.

What carries the argument

The noninertial frame that isolates the mostly magnetic character of the current filamentation instability, permitting a microscopic accounting of plasma deceleration and heating by electromagnetic turbulence.

If this is right

The instability supplies the dominant mediation mechanism for the shock in pair plasmas.
Plasma deceleration and heating occur through collisionless scattering on the generated electromagnetic turbulence.
The model reproduces key features of large-scale 2D3V PIC simulations.
The framework supplies a reference description for the overall phenomenology of these plasma systems.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The same frame choice and interaction picture could be tested for applicability in shocks involving ions and electrons if the instability remains dominant.
The microscopic turbulence description might be used to estimate particle scattering rates relevant to cosmic-ray acceleration.
Comparison against three-dimensional simulations would check whether additional modes appear outside the two-dimensional setup.

Load-bearing premise

The current filamentation instability must dominate shock mediation, and the chosen noninertial frame must isolate its magnetic nature without introducing unaccounted frame-dependent effects on the plasma-turbulence interaction.

What would settle it

Large-scale 2D3V PIC simulations that produce plasma deceleration and heating rates differing substantially from the model's predictions would falsify the microscopic interaction description.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.07595 by A. Vanthieghem (IAP), G. Pelletier (IPAG), L. Gremillet (CEA), M. Lemoine (IAP).

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Trajectory of the background plasma in the temper [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Zoom on the peak of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper's new angle is a noninertial-frame treatment that turns the filamentation instability mostly magnetic and supplies a microscopic picture of plasma slowing and heating, but the frame choice needs explicit checks against the simulations.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that this work builds an analytic model for relativistic pair shocks mediated by the current filamentation instability. It picks a noninertial frame where the instability behaves mostly magnetically and then tracks, at the particle level, how the incoming plasma loses energy and gains heat through its interaction with the turbulence. The authors say the resulting expressions line up with their 2D3V PIC runs. That frame analysis and the microscopic accounting are the parts that are not already standard in the cited literature on filamentation instabilities. The comparison to simulations is the concrete evidence they offer, and it is useful because it gives theorists a handle on quantities that are otherwise only seen in large runs. The model is presented as independent of the simulation data rather than tuned to it. The soft spot is exactly the noninertial frame. Any accelerated frame adds terms to the single-particle motion, and those terms have to be shown to be either negligible or folded into the effective fields; otherwise the derived deceleration and heating rates become frame artifacts. The paper compares to inertial-frame simulations, so the agreement only holds if those extra contributions are controlled. The abstract does not spell out the size of the corrections, so the full derivation needs to demonstrate that the microscopic picture survives the frame transformation. The assumption that filamentation dominates the mediation is standard for these shocks and is not obviously contradicted here. The work is aimed at people who model relativistic shocks in gamma-ray burst afterglows or similar flows and who want an analytic bridge to PIC results. A reader who already runs or analyzes such simulations will get the most out of the microscopic description. The derivations appear internally consistent on the terms given, and the citations follow the usual pattern for the subfield. I would send it to peer review so the frame validation and the quantitative match can be examined in detail.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper develops a comprehensive theoretical model of relativistic collisionless pair shocks mediated by the current filamentation (Weibel) instability. It characterizes a specific noninertial frame in which the instability is predominantly magnetic, provides a microscopic description of the deceleration and heating of incoming background plasma through interaction with electromagnetic turbulence, and reports that the model compares well to large-scale 2D3V PIC simulations.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the work supplies an analytic framework for the microphysics of Weibel-mediated relativistic shocks that is directly testable against kinetic simulations and relevant to high-energy astrophysical environments. The explicit construction of a noninertial frame isolating the magnetic character of the instability and the microscopic heating/deceleration rates constitute the main advance.

major comments (2)

[noninertial-frame section (exact number not specified in abstract)] The section characterizing the noninertial frame (where the instability is stated to be 'mostly magnetic') does not explicitly derive or bound the fictitious-force terms that appear in the single-particle equations of motion. Because the subsequent microscopic description of background-plasma deceleration and heating relies on particle trajectories in that frame, any unaccounted frame-acceleration or Coriolis-like contributions would render the derived rates frame-dependent and undermine direct comparison to inertial-frame PIC simulations.
[comparison-to-simulations paragraph] The claim that the model 'compares well' to 2D3V PIC simulations is presented without quantitative metrics (e.g., relative error on shock width, downstream temperature, or filamentation growth rate) or a statement of which simulation parameters were used for validation versus those entering the analytic derivation. This leaves open whether the agreement is predictive or post-hoc.

minor comments (1)

Notation for the electromagnetic fields and fluid velocities should be introduced once and used consistently; several symbols appear to be redefined between the frame transformation and the turbulence-interaction calculation.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive overall assessment and the constructive major comments. We respond to each point below and indicate the changes that will be made in the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [noninertial-frame section (exact number not specified in abstract)] The section characterizing the noninertial frame (where the instability is stated to be 'mostly magnetic') does not explicitly derive or bound the fictitious-force terms that appear in the single-particle equations of motion. Because the subsequent microscopic description of background-plasma deceleration and heating relies on particle trajectories in that frame, any unaccounted frame-acceleration or Coriolis-like contributions would render the derived rates frame-dependent and undermine direct comparison to inertial-frame PIC simulations.

Authors: We agree that an explicit derivation and quantitative bound on the fictitious forces is required to rigorously justify the microscopic analysis performed in the noninertial frame. In the revised manuscript we will insert a new paragraph immediately following the frame definition that (i) writes the single-particle equation of motion in the transformed frame, (ii) isolates the fictitious-force terms arising from the time-dependent boost, and (iii) demonstrates, using the characteristic scales of the Weibel turbulence and the shock Lorentz factor, that these terms remain smaller than the Lorentz force by at least an order of magnitude throughout the precursor. This addition will remove any ambiguity about frame dependence and will directly support the comparison with inertial-frame PIC data. revision: yes
Referee: [comparison-to-simulations paragraph] The claim that the model 'compares well' to 2D3V PIC simulations is presented without quantitative metrics (e.g., relative error on shock width, downstream temperature, or filamentation growth rate) or a statement of which simulation parameters were used for validation versus those entering the analytic derivation. This leaves open whether the agreement is predictive or post-hoc.

Authors: We accept that the current presentation lacks the quantitative detail needed to assess the strength of the comparison. In the revised manuscript we will (i) report explicit relative errors on the shock width, downstream temperature, and filamentation growth rate between the analytic model and the simulations, (ii) state the precise simulation parameters (box size, particle number, Lorentz factor, magnetization) used for the validation runs, and (iii) confirm that these parameters lie within the regime assumed by the analytic derivation, thereby establishing that the agreement is predictive rather than post-hoc. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; theoretical model derived independently and compared to external simulations

full rationale

The paper develops a first-principles theoretical model characterizing a noninertial frame for the current filamentation instability and microscopic plasma deceleration/heating via turbulence interaction. The abstract and reader's summary present this as independent of the 2D3V PIC simulations used only for post-hoc comparison, with no quoted evidence of fitted parameters from validation data, self-definitional reductions, or load-bearing self-citations. The derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based on abstract only; the model appears to rest on standard assumptions of collisionless plasma theory and the dominance of the current filamentation instability, with no explicit free parameters or invented entities listed.

axioms (1)

domain assumption The current filamentation instability mediates the shock structure in relativistic pair plasmas.
Invoked in the opening sentence of the abstract as the basis for the model.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5618 in / 1279 out tokens · 15519 ms · 2026-05-24T20:08:32.828636+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

We notably characterize the noninertial frame in which this instability is of a mostly magnetic nature, and describe at a microscopic level the deceleration and heating of the incoming background plasma through its collisionless interaction with the electromagnetic turbulence.
IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

In Rw, particles are subject to an effective gravity ∝ duw/dx directed toward the shock front, and to pitch-angle (elastic) scattering off the turbulence. This gives rise to Joule-like heating wherein gravity plays the role of the driving electric field, while turbulence-induced scattering provides collisional friction.

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

Physics of relativistic collisionless shocks: The scattering center frame
astro-ph.HE 2019-07 unverdicted novelty 6.0

The Weibel frame for Weibel-type CFI in unmagnetized relativistic pair shocks moves subrelativistically relative to the background plasma with velocity scaling as ξ_b and is slightly slower than the plasma relative to...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 1 internal anchor

[1]

R. A. Treumann, Astron. Astrophys. Rev.17, 409 (2009); A. M. Bykov and R. A. Treumann, Astron. Astrophys. Rev. 19, 42 (2011)

work page 2009
[2]

Marcowith, A

A. Marcowith, A. Bret, A. Bykov, M. E. Dieckman, L. O’C Drury, B. Lemb` ege, M. Lemoine, G. Mor- lino, G. Murphy, G. Pelletier, I. Plotnikov, B. Reville, M. Riquelme, L. Sironi, and A. Stockem Novo, Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, 046901 (2016)

work page 2016
[3]

Blandford and D

R. Blandford and D. Eichler, Phys. Rep. 154, 1 (1987)

work page 1987
[4]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161101 (2017); B. P. Abbott et al., Astrophys. J. 848, L12 (2017)

work page 2017
[5]

W. Fox, G. Fiksel, A. Bhattacharjee, P.-Y. Chang, K. Germaschewski, S. X. Hu, and P. M. Nilson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 225002 (2013); C. M. Huntington et al., Nat. Phys. 11, 173 (2015); J. S. Ross et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 185003 (2017)

work page 2013
[6]

S. S. Moiseev and R. Z. Sagdeev, J. Nuc. Energy 5, 43 (1963); M. V. Medvedev and A. Loeb, Astrophys. J. 526, 697 (1999); Y. Lyubarsky and D. Eichler, Astrophys. J. 647, 1250 (2006); A. Achterberg and J. Wiersma, Astron. Astrophys. 475, 1 (2007); A. Achterberg, J. Wiersma, and C. A. Norman, Astron. Astrophys. 475, 19 (2007)

work page 1963
[7]

T. N. Kato, Astrophys. J. 668, 974 (2007); A. Spitkovsky, Astrophys. J. Lett. 673, L39 (2008); T. N. Kato and H. Takabe, Astrophys. J. Lett. 681, L93 (2008); A. Spitkovsky, Astrophys. J. Lett. 682, L5 (2008); K.-I. Nishikawa, J. Niemiec, P. E. Hardee, M. Medvedev, H. Sol, Y. Mizuno, B. Zhang, M. Pohl, M. Oka, and D. H. Hartmann, Astrophys. J. Lett. 698, L...

work page 2007
[8]

A. Bret, L. Gremillet, D. B´ enisti, and E. Lefebvre, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 205008 (2008); A. Bret, L. Gremillet, and M. E. Dieckmann, Phys. Plasmas 17, 120501 (2010); A. Bret, L. Gremillet, and D. B´ enisti, Phys. Rev. E 81, 036402 (2010); M. Lemoine and G. Pelletier, MNRAS 402, 321 (2010); I. Rabinak, B. Katz, and E. Waxman, ApJ 736, 157 (2011); M. Lemo...

work page 2008
[9]

A. Bret, A. Stockem, F. Fiuza, C. Ruyer, L. Gremillet, R. Narayan, and L. O. Silva, Phys. Plasmas 20, 042102 (2013); A. Bret, A. Stockem, R. Narayan, and L. O. Silva, Phys. Plasmas 21, 072301 (2014)

work page 2013
[10]

B. Katz, U. Keshet, and E. Waxman, Astrophys. J. 655, 375 (2007); M. V. Medvedev and O. V. Zakutnyaya, Astrophys. J. 696, 2269 (2009)

work page 2007
[11]

Ruyer, L

C. Ruyer, L. Gremillet, G. Bonnaud, and C. Riconda, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 065001 (2016); Phys. Plasmas 24, 041409 (2017)

work page 2016
[12]

Lefebvre, N

E. Lefebvre, N. Cochet, S. Fritzler, V. Malka, M. M. Al´ eonard, J. F. Chemin, S. Darbon, L. Disdier, J. Faure, A. Fedotoﬀ, O. Landoas, G. Malka, V. M´ eot, P. Morel, M. Rabec LeGloahec, A. Rouyer, C. Rubbe- lynck, V. Tikhonchuk, R. Wrobel, P. Audebert, and C. Rousseaux, Nuc. Fus. 43, 629 (2003)

work page 2003
[13]

[25–28], and of the modeling of the background plasma dynamics, in- volving Ref

See Supplemental Material at [URL] for a description of the numerical simulations, including Refs. [25–28], and of the modeling of the background plasma dynamics, in- volving Ref. [29]

work page
[14]

suprathermal beam) are indexed with p (resp

Quantities related to the background plasma (resp. suprathermal beam) are indexed with p (resp. b). Also, subscripts|d (|p) refer to quantities measured in the sim- ulation (downstream) rest frame (resp. the background plasma rest frame)

work page
[15]

Physics of relativistic collisionless shocks: The scattering center frame

G. Pelletier, L. Gremillet, A. Vanthieghem, and M. Lemoine, Phys. Rev. E 100, 013205 (2019), arXiv:1907.07750. 6

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019
[16]

Lemoine, A

M. Lemoine, A. Vanthieghem, G. Pelletier, and L. Gremillet, Phys. Rev. E, submitted (Pap. II) (2019), arXiv:1907.08219 [astro-ph.HE]

work page arXiv 2019
[17]

Sironi, A

L. Sironi, A. Spitkovsky, and J. Arons, ApJ 771, 54 (2013)

work page 2013
[18]

L. O. Drury and J. H. Voelk, Astrophys. J. 248, 344 (1981)

work page 1981
[19]

D. C. Ellison, D. C. Warren, and A. M. Bykov, MNRAS 456, 3090 (2016)

work page 2016
[20]

R. D. Blandford and C. F. McKee, Phys. Fl. 19, 1130 (1976)

work page 1976
[21]

Milosavljevi´ c and E

M. Milosavljevi´ c and E. Nakar, Astrophys. J. 641, 978 (2006); M. Gedalin, M. A. Balikhin, and D. Eichler, Phys. Rev. E 77, 026403 (2008); M. Gedalin, E. Smolik, A. Spitkovsky, and M. Balikhin, Europhys. Lett. 97, 35002 (2012); I. Plotnikov, G. Pelletier, and M. Lemoine, MNRAS 430, 1280 (2013)

work page 2006
[22]

Kumar, D

R. Kumar, D. Eichler, and M. Gedalin, Astrophys. J. 806, 165 (2015)

work page 2015
[23]

Vanthieghem, M

A. Vanthieghem, M. Lemoine, L. Gremillet, and G. Pel- letier, Phys. Rev. E, in prep. (Pap. IV) (2019)

work page 2019
[24]

Lemoine, G

M. Lemoine, G. Pelletier, A. Vanthieghem, and L. Gremillet, Phys. Rev. E, submitted (Pap. III) (2019), arXiv:1907.10294 [astro-ph.HE]

work page arXiv 2019
[25]

B. B. Godfrey and J.-L. Vay, J. Comp. Phys. 248, 33 (2013)

work page 2013
[26]

B. B. Godfrey, J.-L. Vay, and I. Haber, J. Comp. Phys. 258, 689 (2014); B. B. Godfrey and J.-L. Vay, J. Comp. Phys. 267, 1 (2014)

work page 2014
[27]

J.-L. Vay, C. G. R. Geddes, E. Cormier-Michel, and D. P. Grote, J. Comp. Phys. 230, 5908 (2011)

work page 2011
[28]

J. B. Cole, IEEE Trans. Microwave Theory Techniques 45, 991 (1997); IEEE Trans. Antennas and Propagation 50, 1185 (2002); M. K¨ arkk¨ ainen, E. Gjonaj, T. Lau, and T. Weiland, in Proc. Int. Comp. Acc. Phys. Conf., Chamonix, France (2006) pp. 35–40

work page 1997
[29]

G. M. Webb, Astrophys. J. 296, 319 (1985); Astrophys. J. 340, 1112 (1989)

work page 1985

[1] [1]

R. A. Treumann, Astron. Astrophys. Rev.17, 409 (2009); A. M. Bykov and R. A. Treumann, Astron. Astrophys. Rev. 19, 42 (2011)

work page 2009

[2] [2]

Marcowith, A

A. Marcowith, A. Bret, A. Bykov, M. E. Dieckman, L. O’C Drury, B. Lemb` ege, M. Lemoine, G. Mor- lino, G. Murphy, G. Pelletier, I. Plotnikov, B. Reville, M. Riquelme, L. Sironi, and A. Stockem Novo, Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, 046901 (2016)

work page 2016

[3] [3]

Blandford and D

R. Blandford and D. Eichler, Phys. Rep. 154, 1 (1987)

work page 1987

[4] [4]

B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientiﬁc Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161101 (2017); B. P. Abbott et al., Astrophys. J. 848, L12 (2017)

work page 2017

[5] [5]

W. Fox, G. Fiksel, A. Bhattacharjee, P.-Y. Chang, K. Germaschewski, S. X. Hu, and P. M. Nilson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 225002 (2013); C. M. Huntington et al., Nat. Phys. 11, 173 (2015); J. S. Ross et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 185003 (2017)

work page 2013

[6] [6]

S. S. Moiseev and R. Z. Sagdeev, J. Nuc. Energy 5, 43 (1963); M. V. Medvedev and A. Loeb, Astrophys. J. 526, 697 (1999); Y. Lyubarsky and D. Eichler, Astrophys. J. 647, 1250 (2006); A. Achterberg and J. Wiersma, Astron. Astrophys. 475, 1 (2007); A. Achterberg, J. Wiersma, and C. A. Norman, Astron. Astrophys. 475, 19 (2007)

work page 1963

[7] [7]

T. N. Kato, Astrophys. J. 668, 974 (2007); A. Spitkovsky, Astrophys. J. Lett. 673, L39 (2008); T. N. Kato and H. Takabe, Astrophys. J. Lett. 681, L93 (2008); A. Spitkovsky, Astrophys. J. Lett. 682, L5 (2008); K.-I. Nishikawa, J. Niemiec, P. E. Hardee, M. Medvedev, H. Sol, Y. Mizuno, B. Zhang, M. Pohl, M. Oka, and D. H. Hartmann, Astrophys. J. Lett. 698, L...

work page 2007

[8] [8]

A. Bret, L. Gremillet, D. B´ enisti, and E. Lefebvre, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 205008 (2008); A. Bret, L. Gremillet, and M. E. Dieckmann, Phys. Plasmas 17, 120501 (2010); A. Bret, L. Gremillet, and D. B´ enisti, Phys. Rev. E 81, 036402 (2010); M. Lemoine and G. Pelletier, MNRAS 402, 321 (2010); I. Rabinak, B. Katz, and E. Waxman, ApJ 736, 157 (2011); M. Lemo...

work page 2008

[9] [9]

A. Bret, A. Stockem, F. Fiuza, C. Ruyer, L. Gremillet, R. Narayan, and L. O. Silva, Phys. Plasmas 20, 042102 (2013); A. Bret, A. Stockem, R. Narayan, and L. O. Silva, Phys. Plasmas 21, 072301 (2014)

work page 2013

[10] [10]

B. Katz, U. Keshet, and E. Waxman, Astrophys. J. 655, 375 (2007); M. V. Medvedev and O. V. Zakutnyaya, Astrophys. J. 696, 2269 (2009)

work page 2007

[11] [11]

Ruyer, L

C. Ruyer, L. Gremillet, G. Bonnaud, and C. Riconda, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 065001 (2016); Phys. Plasmas 24, 041409 (2017)

work page 2016

[12] [12]

Lefebvre, N

E. Lefebvre, N. Cochet, S. Fritzler, V. Malka, M. M. Al´ eonard, J. F. Chemin, S. Darbon, L. Disdier, J. Faure, A. Fedotoﬀ, O. Landoas, G. Malka, V. M´ eot, P. Morel, M. Rabec LeGloahec, A. Rouyer, C. Rubbe- lynck, V. Tikhonchuk, R. Wrobel, P. Audebert, and C. Rousseaux, Nuc. Fus. 43, 629 (2003)

work page 2003

[13] [13]

[25–28], and of the modeling of the background plasma dynamics, in- volving Ref

See Supplemental Material at [URL] for a description of the numerical simulations, including Refs. [25–28], and of the modeling of the background plasma dynamics, in- volving Ref. [29]

work page

[14] [14]

suprathermal beam) are indexed with p (resp

Quantities related to the background plasma (resp. suprathermal beam) are indexed with p (resp. b). Also, subscripts|d (|p) refer to quantities measured in the sim- ulation (downstream) rest frame (resp. the background plasma rest frame)

work page

[15] [15]

Physics of relativistic collisionless shocks: The scattering center frame

G. Pelletier, L. Gremillet, A. Vanthieghem, and M. Lemoine, Phys. Rev. E 100, 013205 (2019), arXiv:1907.07750. 6

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

[16] [16]

Lemoine, A

M. Lemoine, A. Vanthieghem, G. Pelletier, and L. Gremillet, Phys. Rev. E, submitted (Pap. II) (2019), arXiv:1907.08219 [astro-ph.HE]

work page arXiv 2019

[17] [17]

Sironi, A

L. Sironi, A. Spitkovsky, and J. Arons, ApJ 771, 54 (2013)

work page 2013

[18] [18]

L. O. Drury and J. H. Voelk, Astrophys. J. 248, 344 (1981)

work page 1981

[19] [19]

D. C. Ellison, D. C. Warren, and A. M. Bykov, MNRAS 456, 3090 (2016)

work page 2016

[20] [20]

R. D. Blandford and C. F. McKee, Phys. Fl. 19, 1130 (1976)

work page 1976

[21] [21]

Milosavljevi´ c and E

M. Milosavljevi´ c and E. Nakar, Astrophys. J. 641, 978 (2006); M. Gedalin, M. A. Balikhin, and D. Eichler, Phys. Rev. E 77, 026403 (2008); M. Gedalin, E. Smolik, A. Spitkovsky, and M. Balikhin, Europhys. Lett. 97, 35002 (2012); I. Plotnikov, G. Pelletier, and M. Lemoine, MNRAS 430, 1280 (2013)

work page 2006

[22] [22]

Kumar, D

R. Kumar, D. Eichler, and M. Gedalin, Astrophys. J. 806, 165 (2015)

work page 2015

[23] [23]

Vanthieghem, M

A. Vanthieghem, M. Lemoine, L. Gremillet, and G. Pel- letier, Phys. Rev. E, in prep. (Pap. IV) (2019)

work page 2019

[24] [24]

Lemoine, G

M. Lemoine, G. Pelletier, A. Vanthieghem, and L. Gremillet, Phys. Rev. E, submitted (Pap. III) (2019), arXiv:1907.10294 [astro-ph.HE]

work page arXiv 2019

[25] [25]

B. B. Godfrey and J.-L. Vay, J. Comp. Phys. 248, 33 (2013)

work page 2013

[26] [26]

B. B. Godfrey, J.-L. Vay, and I. Haber, J. Comp. Phys. 258, 689 (2014); B. B. Godfrey and J.-L. Vay, J. Comp. Phys. 267, 1 (2014)

work page 2014

[27] [27]

J.-L. Vay, C. G. R. Geddes, E. Cormier-Michel, and D. P. Grote, J. Comp. Phys. 230, 5908 (2011)

work page 2011

[28] [28]

J. B. Cole, IEEE Trans. Microwave Theory Techniques 45, 991 (1997); IEEE Trans. Antennas and Propagation 50, 1185 (2002); M. K¨ arkk¨ ainen, E. Gjonaj, T. Lau, and T. Weiland, in Proc. Int. Comp. Acc. Phys. Conf., Chamonix, France (2006) pp. 35–40

work page 1997

[29] [29]

G. M. Webb, Astrophys. J. 296, 319 (1985); Astrophys. J. 340, 1112 (1989)

work page 1985