pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.20992 · v1 · pith:I5BWHFARnew · submitted 2026-06-18 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · math-ph· math.MP

Two stages of magnetic filament formation in the solar convective zone

Evgeny Kuznetsov , Evgeny Mikhailov , Vlada Khvoshchinskaia This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 15:12 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR math-phmath.MP
keywords magnetic filamentssolar convection zoneMHD approximationhyperbolic flow regionskinematic stagemagnetic saturationconvective boundaries
0
0 comments X

The pith

Magnetic filaments form at convective cell boundaries in two stages: kinematic concentration followed by magnetic back-reaction until energies balance.

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

The paper distinguishes two stages of magnetic filament formation in the solar convective zone. In the first stage the field is frozen into the flow and concentrates at hyperbolic regions along cell boundaries, which act as attractors; this depends only on surface flow behavior at the flat free boundary. In the second stage the growing magnetic pressure slows the flow, shifts the hyperbolic regions outward, and widens the filament until kinetic and magnetic energy densities become comparable. A reader would care because the process explains how ordinary convection can produce strong, localized magnetic structures without relying on the internal details of convective cells.

Core claim

At the initial stage, magnetic filaments begin to form at the boundaries of convective cells in hyperbolic regions of the flow that act as attractors for the magnetic field. The formation is independent of the internal structure of the convective cells and is determined by the behavior of the convective flow along the free surface. In the next stage the magnetic field pressure gradient impedes the convective flow, shifting the hyperbolic regions toward the convective flow along the free surface so that the transverse size of the filament increases and stops when the kinetic energy density and the magnetic field energy density become comparable.

What carries the argument

Hyperbolic regions of the surface flow that first attract the frozen-in magnetic field and later shift outward under magnetic pressure until energies equilibrate.

If this is right

  • Filament formation occurs independently of convective cell interiors.
  • Initial field at the free boundary is predominantly normal to the surface.
  • Saturation occurs when kinetic and magnetic energy densities become comparable.
  • After the kinematic stage, finite conductivity limits further growth inside the filament.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same surface-flow mechanism could organize magnetic structures in other stars with comparable convection.
  • Measured widths of solar filaments could be compared directly against the predicted energy-balance stopping point.
  • Models of surface magnetism could be reduced to two-dimensional flow problems at the free boundary.

Load-bearing premise

The free boundary of the convective zone near cell interfaces can be treated as flat so that filament growth and saturation are set solely by the surface flow.

What would settle it

A simulation or observation in which filament formation requires the internal cell structure or saturates at an energy-density ratio far from unity would falsify the two-stage surface-flow model.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.20992 by Evgeny Kuznetsov, Evgeny Mikhailov, Vlada Khvoshchinskaia.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: A solar cell (SOHO magnetogram). Red arrows indicate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Magnetic field lines (red) in a convective cell (curre [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: The magnetic field potential at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Dependence of the maximum magnetic field at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Field dependence on time. The red curve shows [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Magnetic field dependence on coordinate at Re [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: Dependence of velocity on coordinate at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This paper presents a brief overview of studies of magnetic filament formation in the solar convection zone. Two stages of magnetic filament formation and development are distinguished. The first stage can be described within the kinematic approximation for the MHD equation, since the average kinetic energy of convective motion exceeds the average magnetic field energy. Moreover, magnetic Reynolds number is on the order of $10^6$. Therefore, at the initial stage of magnetic filament formation, the magnetic field can be considered frozen-in. It turns out that at this stage, magnetic filaments begin to form at the boundaries of convective cells in hyperbolic regions of the flow. These regions act as attractors for the magnetic field. At the free boundary of the convective zone near the interfaces between convective cells, the magnetic field has a predominantly normal component relative to the boundary. As the magnetic field increases, the field's frozen-in nature in the filament is disrupted, and saturation occurs due to finite conductivity. It is important to note that the magnetic field growth and saturation in the filament at this stage can be determined by analyzing the behavior of the magnetic field at the free boundary, which, according to observations, can be considered flat. Moreover, the formation of magnetic filaments is independent of the internal structure of the convective cells and is determined by the behavior of the convective flow along the free surface. In the next stage, when the magnetic field in the filament is sufficiently strong, the magnetic field pressure gradient begins to impede the convective flow, leading to a shift of the hyperbolic regions toward the convective flow along the free surface. As a result, the transverse size of the filament increases and stops when the kinetic energy density and the magnetic field energy density become comparable.

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

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript provides a brief overview distinguishing two stages of magnetic filament formation in the solar convective zone. Stage 1 is treated in the kinematic MHD approximation (high Rm ~10^6, frozen-in field) where filaments form at hyperbolic flow regions at convective cell boundaries that act as attractors; growth and saturation are asserted to be determinable solely from behavior at the free surface (treated as flat per observations), independent of internal cell structure, with saturation due to finite conductivity. Stage 2 occurs when magnetic pressure impedes flow, shifting hyperbolic regions along the free surface so that filament transverse size grows until kinetic and magnetic energy densities become comparable.

Significance. If the two-stage separation and the surface-flow independence hold, the work could simplify models of solar magnetic structuring by decoupling filament properties from deep convective details. The explicit separation of kinematic versus dynamic regimes and the attractor role of hyperbolic points are conceptually useful, though the absence of supporting derivations or quantitative tests limits immediate predictive power.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract (and the central claim paragraph): the assertion that 'the formation of magnetic filaments is independent of the internal structure of the convective cells and is determined by the behavior of the convective flow along the free surface' and that 'magnetic field growth and saturation ... can be determined by analyzing the behavior of the magnetic field at the free boundary' rests on the flat-boundary approximation. No quantitative tolerance on curvature, no estimate of how granulation-scale deviations would alter normal-component dominance or attractor dynamics, and no derivation showing that stage-2 impedance and transverse-size saturation remain unchanged under boundary deformation are supplied; this approximation is load-bearing for the independence claim.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract (stage-2 description): the statements that 'the magnetic field pressure gradient begins to impede the convective flow, leading to a shift of the hyperbolic regions' and that 'the transverse size of the filament increases and stops when the kinetic energy density and the magnetic field energy density become comparable' are presented without reference to specific equations, scaling arguments, or cited derivations that demonstrate how the impedance produces the described shift and saturation; these steps are load-bearing for the two-stage distinction.
minor comments (1)
  1. The manuscript is described as a 'brief overview of studies'; adding one or two key equations or scaling relations from the referenced literature would clarify how the frozen-in condition and hyperbolic attractors follow from the MHD induction equation under the stated Rm.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments. The manuscript is intended as a brief conceptual overview of two-stage filament formation rather than a full derivation paper; we address the load-bearing claims below and will revise the abstract and text for clarity where the approximations and transitions require additional qualification.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (and the central claim paragraph): the assertion that 'the formation of magnetic filaments is independent of the internal structure of the convective cells and is determined by the behavior of the convective flow along the free surface' and that 'magnetic field growth and saturation ... can be determined by analyzing the behavior of the magnetic field at the free boundary' rests on the flat-boundary approximation. No quantitative tolerance on curvature, no estimate of how granulation-scale deviations would alter normal-component dominance or attractor dynamics, and no derivation showing that stage-2 impedance and transverse-size saturation remain unchanged under boundary deformation are supplied; this approximation is load-bearing for the independence claim.

    Authors: The independence follows from the kinematic (frozen-in) regime at high Rm, where field lines are advected solely by the surface flow and accumulate at hyperbolic attractors; internal cell structure does not enter because only the surface velocity field determines the normal-component dominance and attractor locations. The flat-boundary statement is observational (granulation appears locally flat on the relevant scales). We agree that no quantitative tolerance on curvature or explicit derivation of invariance under deformation is supplied. We will revise to add a short qualifying sentence noting that the approximation holds for observed granulation flatness and that curvature effects would require separate 3D simulations outside the scope of this overview. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (stage-2 description): the statements that 'the magnetic field pressure gradient begins to impede the convective flow, leading to a shift of the hyperbolic regions' and that 'the transverse size of the filament increases and stops when the kinetic energy density and the magnetic field energy density become comparable' are presented without reference to specific equations, scaling arguments, or cited derivations that demonstrate how the impedance produces the described shift and saturation; these steps are load-bearing for the two-stage distinction.

    Authors: Stage 2 is the transition out of the kinematic regime once magnetic pressure becomes dynamically important. The impedance shifts the surface hyperbolic points because the Lorentz force opposes the inflow, allowing the filament to widen until equipartition halts further growth; this is a standard MHD scaling (magnetic pressure gradient balancing convective ram pressure). Because the manuscript is an overview, the steps are stated qualitatively. We will revise the abstract and add a brief parenthetical reference to the equipartition scaling and to prior MHD literature that derives the shift and saturation explicitly. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: derivation applies standard MHD to observed boundary geometry

full rationale

The paper's two-stage description follows directly from the kinematic MHD limit (kinetic energy > magnetic energy, Rm ~ 10^6 implying frozen-in field) applied to hyperbolic flow regions at cell boundaries, with the flat free-surface assumption stated as an observational input rather than derived internally. Growth and saturation are analyzed at that boundary without any fitted parameters, self-referential definitions, or load-bearing self-citations that reduce the result to its own inputs. The independence from internal cell structure is a direct consequence of the boundary-dominated analysis under the stated approximations, not a renaming or smuggling of an ansatz. The derivation is therefore self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The description relies on standard MHD domain assumptions and the kinematic regime when kinetic energy exceeds magnetic energy; the magnetic Reynolds number is stated as an order-of-magnitude estimate rather than a fitted parameter.

free parameters (1)
  • magnetic Reynolds number = 10^6
    Stated as on the order of 10^6 to justify the frozen-in approximation in the first stage.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The MHD equations govern the plasma in the solar convective zone
    Implicit in the use of kinematic approximation and frozen-in concept throughout the description.
  • domain assumption The free boundary of the convective zone can be treated as flat
    Invoked to determine field growth and saturation from boundary behavior.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5848 in / 1493 out tokens · 37045 ms · 2026-06-26T15:12:03.251806+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

66 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    on the generation of magnetic filaments by a convective system of hexagonal cells. In one of our previous studies, we numerically simulated the corresp onding process within the kinematic approximation [44], when the magnetic fie ld energy is relatively small compared to the energy of turbulent motions. In t his case, at the interface between convective cel...

  2. [2]

    Convective cells are responsible for the formation of magnetic fila ments in the solar convection zone

  3. [3]

    This process is exponential in time at high magnetic Reynolds numbers

    At the kinematic stage, when the average kinetic energy exceed s the average magnetic field energy, the formation of magnetic filaments is due to t he com- pressibility of continuously distributed magnetic field lines, a consequ ence of the frozen-in magnetic field. This process is exponential in time at high magnetic Reynolds numbers

  4. [4]

    The increase in the magnetic field in a filamen t is of the order of √ Rem

    In the kinematic limit, the magnetic field saturation of the filaments occurs due to finite conductivity. The increase in the magnetic field in a filamen t is of the order of √ Rem. For the solar convection zone, the magnetic field values in filaments in this regime can be 1 − 10 kG; 26

  5. [5]

    The region of these flows represents a unique attractor of magnetic fields

    Magnetic filaments on the Sun form at the boundaries of convect ive cells, which coincide with descending convective flows. The region of these flows represents a unique attractor of magnetic fields. This attractor is a hyperbolic region of hydrodynamic flows. The magnetic field reaches its maximum at the hyperbolic point

  6. [6]

    Based on observations, the boundary of the convective zone c an be consid- ered flat with good accuracy. In this case, the kinematic stage allow s us to elucidate the most general patterns of filament formation and dev elopment — a process independent of the internal structure of the convec tive cell flow. Specifically, it has been shown that all types of loc...

  7. [7]

    At this stage, we found that the magnetic pressure gradient pushes the convective flow, shifting the hyperbolic point toward the flow

    When the magnetic field growth in the filaments is significant, the gr owing magnetic fields in the filaments begin to influence the convective flow. At this stage, we found that the magnetic pressure gradient pushes the convective flow, shifting the hyperbolic point toward the flow. As a result, the fi lament size increases compared to the filament width in the kin...

  8. [8]

    Gaponov A.V., Miller M.A. // JETP. — 1958. — V. 34, No.1. — P .168—169

    1958

  9. [9]

    Gaponov A.V., Miller M.A. // JETP. — 1958. — V. 34, No.3. — P .515—516

    1958

  10. [10]

    Vedenov A.A., Rudakov L.I.// Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR. - 196 4. - T. 159, No. 4. - P. 767-770 (in Russ.)

  11. [11]

    Zakharov V. E. // JETP. — 1972. — V. 35, No.5. — P.908 – 914. 27

    1972

  12. [12]

    E., Kuznetsov E

    Zakharov V. E., Kuznetsov E. A. // Phys.Usp. — 2012. — V.55 . — P. 535–556. DOI:10.3367/UFNe.0182.201206a.0569

    work page doi:10.3367/ufne.0182.201206a.0569 2012

  13. [13]

    Kolmogorov A. N. // Dokl. Akad. Nauk. SSSR. – 1941. – V. 31. – P.538–541 (in Russ.)

    1941

  14. [14]

    Obukhov A. M. // Dokl. Akad. Nauk. SSSR. – 1941. – V. 32. – P. 22–24 (in Russ.)

    1941

  15. [15]

    // Hydrodynamics

    Lamb H. // Hydrodynamics. Cambridge University Press, C ambridge, UK, 1932

    1932

  16. [16]

    K.// An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics

    Batchelor G. K.// An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics. Cam bridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1967. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511800955

    work page doi:10.1017/cbo9780511800955 1967

  17. [17]

    Annual Review of Nuclear and Parti- cle Science52(Volume 52, 2002), 115– 151 (2002) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev

    Salmon R. // Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics. 1988. – V. 20. – P.225–256. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.fl.20.010188.001301

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev 1988

  18. [18]

    E., Kuznetsov E

    Zakharov V. E., Kuznetsov E. A. // Phys. Usp. – 1997. – V.4 0. – P.1087–1116. DOI: 10.1070/PU1997v040n11ABEH000304

    work page doi:10.1070/pu1997v040n11abeh000304 1997

  19. [19]

    // Ra diophysics and Quantum Electronics

    Abrashkin A.A., Zen‘kovich D.A., Yakubovich E.I. // Ra diophysics and Quantum Electronics. – 1996. – V.39. – P.518 – 526. DOI: 10.1007/BF02 122398

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02 1996

  20. [20]

    I., Zenkovich D

    Yakubovich E. I., Zenkovich D. A.// Journal Fluid Mech. – 2001. – V. 443 – P.167–

    2001

  21. [21]

    DOI: 10.1017/S0022112001005195

    work page doi:10.1017/s0022112001005195

  22. [22]

    Alfven Hannes, Arkiv for Matematik, Astrnomi Och Fysik . – 1942. – Band 29 B, No 2. – P.1-7

    1942

  23. [23]

    Yudovich V. I. // USSR Computational Mathematics and Ma thematical Physics. –

  24. [24]

    – V. 3. - No.6. – P.1407–1456. DOI: 10.1016/0041-5553( 63)90247-7

    work page doi:10.1016/0041-5553(

  25. [25]

    // Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis

    Kato T. // Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis. – 1967. – V. 25. – P.188-

    1967

  26. [26]

    DOI: 10.1007/BF00251588

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00251588

  27. [27]

    Gibbon J. D. // Physica D. – 2008. – V.237. – P.1894 – 1904. DOI: 10.1016/j.physd.2007.10.014

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physd.2007.10.014 2008

  28. [28]

    Y., Li R

    Hou T. Y., Li R. // J. Comp. Phys. – 2007. – V.226. – P.379–3 97. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcp.2007.04.014

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2007.04.014 2007

  29. [29]

    A., Naulin V., Nielsen A

    Kuznetsov E. A., Naulin V., Nielsen A. H. et al. // Theor. Comput. Fluid. Dun. 2007, V.19, 105110. DOI: 10.1063/1.2793150 28

    work page doi:10.1063/1.2793150 2007

  30. [30]

    A., Mailybaev A

    Agafontsev D.S., Kuznetsov E. A., Mailybaev A. A., Sere shchenko E. V. // Phys. Usp. – 2022. – V.65. – P.189–208. DOI: 10.3367/UFNe.2020.11 .038875

    work page doi:10.3367/ufne.2020.11 2022

  31. [31]

    S., Kuznetsov E

    Agafontsev D. S., Kuznetsov E. A., Mailybaev A. A. // Phy s.Fluids. – 2015. – V.27. – 085102. DOI: 10.1063/1.4927680

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4927680 2015

  32. [32]

    S., Kuznetsov E

    Agafontsev D. S., Kuznetsov E. A., Mailybaev A. A. // JET P Letters. – 2016. – V.104. – P.685–689. DOI: 10.1134/S002136401622001X

    work page doi:10.1134/s002136401622001x 2016

  33. [33]

    A., Ruban V

    Kuznetsov E. A., Ruban V. P. // JETP Letters. – 1998. – V.6 7. – P.1076–1081. DOI: 10.1134/1.567795

    work page doi:10.1134/1.567795 1998

  34. [34]

    Kuznetsov E. A. // JETP Letters. – 2002. – V.76. – P.346–3 50. DOI: 10.1134/1.1525034

    work page doi:10.1134/1.1525034 2002

  35. [35]

    A., Sereshchenko E

    Kuznetsov E. A., Sereshchenko E. V. // JETP Letters. – 20 19. – V.109. – P.239 –

  36. [36]

    DOI: 10.1134/S0021364019040039

    work page doi:10.1134/s0021364019040039

  37. [37]

    I., Sunyaev R

    Shakura N. I., Sunyaev R. A. // Astronomy and Astrophysi cs. – 1973. – V.24. – 337

    1973

  38. [38]

    R¨ udiger G., Elstner D., Stepinsky T. F. // Astronomy & A strophysics. 1995. V.298, 934–943

    1995

  39. [39]

    Ghasemnezhad // M

    M. Ghasemnezhad // M. Not. R.Astron.Soc. – 2017. – V.469 . – P.3322–3328. DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stx1118 10.1093/mnras/stx1118

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx1118 2017

  40. [40]

    V., Mikhailov E

    Boneva D. V., Mikhailov E. A., Pashentseva M. V., Sokolo ff D. D. // Astronomy and Astrophysics. – 2021. – V.652. – A38. DOI: 10.1051/0004-636 1/202038680

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-636 2021

  41. [41]

    F., Balbus S

    Hawley J. F., Balbus S. A., Stone J. M. // Astrophysical J ournal. – 2001. – V.554. – L49. DOI: 10.1086/320931

    work page doi:10.1086/320931 2001

  42. [42]

    Parker E. N. // Astrophysical Journal. – 1963. – V. 138. – P.552-–575. DOI: 10.1086/147663

    work page doi:10.1086/147663 1963

  43. [43]

    // Astrophysical Journal

    Galloway D.J., Weiss N.O. // Astrophysical Journal. – 1 981. – V. 243. – P.945-–953. DOI: 10.1086/158659

    work page doi:10.1086/158659

  44. [44]

    // Monthly Notices of the Royal A stronomical Society

    Anzer U., Galloway D.J. // Monthly Notices of the Royal A stronomical Society. –

  45. [45]

    – V. 203. – P.637–650. DOI: 10.1093/mnras/203.3.637

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/203.3.637

  46. [46]

    // Geophysical & Astrophysical Fluid Dynamic s

    Arter, W. // Geophysical & Astrophysical Fluid Dynamic s. – 1983. – V. 31. – 29 P.311—344. DOI: 10.1080/03091928308221752

    work page doi:10.1080/03091928308221752 1983

  47. [47]

    Solanki S. K. // Astronomy & Astrophysics Review. – 2003 . – V.11. P.153-–286. DOI: 10.1007/s00159-003-0018-4

    work page doi:10.1007/s00159-003-0018-4 2003

  48. [48]

    Evolution of zero-mean magnetic fields in c ellular flows Physics of Fluids 2005, 17, 103604

    ilvers, L.J. Evolution of zero-mean magnetic fields in c ellular flows Physics of Fluids 2005, 17, 103604. DOI: 10.1063/1.2084247

    work page doi:10.1063/1.2084247 2005

  49. [49]

    // Solar Physics

    Ferriz-Mas A., Steiner O. // Solar Physics. – 2007. – V.2 46. – P.31-–39. DOI: 10.1007/s11207-007-9072-9

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-007-9072-9 2007

  50. [50]

    Nagata S., Tsuneta S., Suematsu Y., Ichimoto K., Katsuk awa Y., Shimizu T., Yokoyama T. et al. // Astrophysical Journal Letters. – 2008. – V.677. – L145. DOI: 10.1086/588026

    work page doi:10.1086/588026 2008

  51. [52]

    // Astro nomy and Astrophysics

    van Noort M., Lagg A., Tiwari S.K., Solanki S.K. // Astro nomy and Astrophysics. – 2013. – V.557. – A25. DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321391

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321391 2013

  52. [53]

    // Physics of Magnetic Flux Tubes

    Ryutova M. // Physics of Magnetic Flux Tubes. Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2018. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-662-45243-1

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-662-45243-1 2018

  53. [54]

    Straßburger (2013): Cut Elimination in Nested Sequents for Intuitionistic Modal Logics

    Stix M. The Sun: an Introduction. Springer, Berlin, 200 2. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642- 56042-2

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-

  54. [55]

    V., Buchnev A

    Getling A. V., Buchnev A. A. // Astronomy Letters. – 2010 . – V.87. – P.254–259. DOI: 10.1134/S1063772910030078

    work page doi:10.1134/s1063772910030078 2010

  55. [56]

    A., Mikhailov E

    Kuznetsov E. A., Mikhailov E. A. // JETP. – 2020. – V.131. – P.496-505. DOI: 10.1134/S106377612009006X

    work page doi:10.1134/s106377612009006x 2020

  56. [57]

    Kitiashvili I.N., Kosovichev A.G., Wray A.A., Mansour , N. N. // Astrophysical Journal. – 2010. – V.719. – P.307-–312. DOI:10.1088/0004-6 37X/719/1/307

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-6 2010

  57. [58]

    Eddy J. A. // A new sun: the solar results from Skylab, 402 Scientific and Technical Information Office, National Aeronautics and Space Agency, W ashington, 1979

    1979

  58. [59]

    Kosovichev A.G.// Space science reviews. – 2009. – V.14 4. – P.175–195. DOI:10.1007/s11214-009-9487-8 30

    work page doi:10.1007/s11214-009-9487-8 2009

  59. [60]

    A., Mikhailov E

    Kuznetsov E. A., Mikhailov E. A. // Mathematics. – 2024. – V.12. – 677. DOI: 10.3390/math12050677

    work page doi:10.3390/math12050677 2024

  60. [61]

    // Phys.Rev.Lett

    Chertkov M., Falkovich G., Kolokolov I., Vergassola M. // Phys.Rev.Lett. – 1999. – V.83. – 4065. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.4065

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.83.4065 1999

  61. [63]

    , Zhuxoviczkij E.M

    Gershuni G.Z. , Zhuxoviczkij E.M. //Konvektivnaya neu stojchivost‘ neszhimaemoj zhidkosti, Nauka, Moskva, 1972

    1972

  62. [64]

    , Spector M.D.// Journal of Applied Mech anics and Technical Physics

    Kuznetsov E.A. , Spector M.D.// Journal of Applied Mech anics and Technical Physics. – 1980. – V.21. – P.220–228. DOI: 10.1007/BF009182 32

    work page doi:10.1007/bf009182 1980

  63. [65]

    Weiss J.// Physica D. – 1991. – V.48. – P.273–294. DOI:10 .1016/0167- 2789(91)90088-Q

    1991

  64. [66]

    // Deep sea research and oceanographic abstrac ts

    Okubo A. // Deep sea research and oceanographic abstrac ts. 1970. V. 17, 445. DOI: 10.1016/0011-7471(70)90059-8

    work page doi:10.1016/0011-7471(70)90059-8 1970

  65. [67]

    Sokoloff D.D. // Phys. Usp. – 2015. – V.58. – P.601–605. DO I: 10.3367/UFNe.0185.201506h.0643

    work page doi:10.3367/ufne.0185.201506h.0643 2015

  66. [68]

    // Fizika zvezd

    Kaplan S.A. // Fizika zvezd. Izd. 3, pererab. i dop. 1977 . 208 s. 31

    1977