pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.26646 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-29 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR

Recognition: unknown

Turbulence and its Potential Impact on Solar Chromospheric and Coronal Heating

Gary P. Zank , Xiaocan Li , Krishna Khanal , Alphonse C. Sterling , Masaru Nakanotani , Linging Zhao , Laxman Adhikari , Yalim Mehmet , Subramania Athiray Panchapakesan , Fan Guo , Ronald L. Moore

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 10:43 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR
keywords solar chromospherecoronal heatingturbulencemagnetic carpetparticle-in-cell simulationenergy transportspiculesElsasser variables
0
0 comments X

The pith

Turbulence from mixed polarity magnetic fields in the solar chromosphere supplies more energy than needed to heat both the chromosphere and corona.

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

The paper examines sources of low-frequency turbulence in the solar chromosphere and its transport and dissipation into the lower corona. Particle-in-cell simulations of mixed polarity fields show rapid transition to turbulence dominated by small-scale advected structures, with anisotropy depending on the guide field strength. A transport model treats these flows as randomly distributed with log-normal statistics to derive height-dependent expectations for energy density, specific energy, heating rate, and correlation length. The central result is that the resulting energy injection rates exceed the requirements for maintaining chromospheric and coronal temperatures, and the same process can heat rising spicules.

Core claim

Simulations of emergent mixed polarity magnetic fields demonstrate a fast shift to a turbulent state with advected nonlinear structures and partial annihilation of the initial field. The transport model then predicts that the expected energy injection rates from this turbulence, both within the chromosphere and at the base of the corona, surpass the energy needed to sustain the observed temperatures in each layer.

What carries the argument

The transport model that advects and dissipates turbulence from randomly distributed energy-containing scale dynamical flows obeying log-normal statistics, yielding height-dependent expectations for total energy per unit volume, Elsasser specific energy, heating rate, and correlation length.

If this is right

  • Turbulent energy injection exceeds the amount required to heat the chromosphere and the base of the corona.
  • Spicules can receive gradual heating with increasing height through entrainment of magnetic carpet and photospheric turbulence.
  • Turbulence remains anisotropic when the guide magnetic field is imbalanced and becomes more isotropic when the field is balanced.
  • Energy reaches the low corona through a random patchwork of injection sites distributed across the transition region surface.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same mechanism could operate in other stellar atmospheres that exhibit mixed polarity surface fields.
  • Spectral observations of velocity or magnetic fluctuations in the chromosphere could directly test the predicted log-normal statistics of the energy-containing scales.
  • Extending the model to include time-dependent or spatially clustered injection sites would allow comparison with localized heating events such as bright points.

Load-bearing premise

Energy-containing scale dynamical flows are randomly distributed throughout the chromosphere and obey log-normal statistics, with turbulence injected by a random patchwork of sites across the transition region surface.

What would settle it

In-situ or remote measurements showing energy injection rates from chromospheric turbulence that fall below the independently estimated heating requirements for the chromosphere or corona would falsify the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.26646 by Alphonse C. Sterling, Fan Guo, Gary P. Zank, Krishna Khanal, Laxman Adhikari, Linging Zhao, Masaru Nakanotani, Ronald L. Moore, Subramania Athiray Panchapakesan, Xiaocan Li, Yalim Mehmet.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A cartoon illustrating the computational box (the orange rectangular cuboid) embedded in the chromosphere. The photosphere lies in the (x, z) plane below the cuboid through which emergent flux passes, including mixed polarity magnetic carpet loops of all characteristic scales, large-scale non-magnetic carpet loops, and some open magnetic field. Nominally, the box is located at a height of between 0.3 and 1… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Left: Plots of the evolving magnetic (blues curve), ion (orange), and electron (green) energies as a function of the normalized time tΩci, all of which are normalized to the initial magnetic energy, excluding the magnetic guide field energy, E ′ B(t = 0). The solid lines are for bg = 1.0, and the dashed lines are for bg = 0.2. Right: Plots of the normalized turbulent magnetic (blue) and kinetic (orange) en… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Left: The three components of the mean magnetic field B¯ = (B¯x, B¯y, B¯z) in the (x, z)-plane at time tΩci = 250. Note that the guide field Bg has been subtracted from B¯y. The magnetic field lines are represented as streamlines of the 2D vector fields (B¯x, B¯z), and the color coding refers to the strength of the magnetic field component with red in the y-positive and blue in the y-negative direction. Mi… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Top: The PSDs for the mean magnetic field components B¯x, B¯y, B¯z as a function of wavenumbers kx, kz. Owing to the presence of very small-scale current sheets, both the B¯x(kz) and B¯y(kz) PSDs are ill-defined. The PSD for B¯z(kz) exists and is well-defined. Bottom: The PSDs for the fluctuating magnetic field components B˜x, B˜y, B˜z as a function of wavenumbers kx, ky, kz. Similar to the mean field, bot… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Left: Power spectral densities (PSDs) EB¯ (kx) (blue), 2×EB˜z (k⊥) (orange), and EB˜tran (k∥) (green) for the mean and fluctuating transverse magnetic fields as a function of wavenumber kx, perpendicular wavenumber k⊥ = √ k 2 x + k 2 z and parallel wavenumber k∥ = ky. Here the subscript “tran” refers to transverse fluctuations only such that B˜tran = p B˜2 x + B˜2 z . Right: As in the left panel except tha… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Left: PSDs Ew¯(kx) (blue), 2 × Ew˜z (k⊥) (orange), and Ew˜tran (k∥) (green) for the mean and fluctuating magnetic fields as a function of wavenumber kx, perpendicular wavenumber k⊥ = √ k 2 x + k 2 z and parallel wavenumber k∥ = ky. Here the subscript “tran” refers to transverse fluctuations only such that ˜wtran = √ w˜ 2 x + ˜w2 z. Right: As in the left panel except that we plot an estimated spectrum for t… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A comparison of the magnetic and kinetic energy spectra, showing the power spectral densities EB˜tran (k⊥) (solid blue curve), EB˜tran (k∥), (solid orange) and Ew˜tran (k⊥) (dashed blue line), Ew˜tran (k∥) (dashed orange) for the transverse fluctuations as a function of the perpendicular k⊥ and parallel k∥ wavenumbers, normalized to the electron inertial length. 10−2 10−1 100 kde 10−12 10−10 10−8 10−6 10−4… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Left: PSDs of the mean and fluctuating Els¨asser energies E ± z¯ (kx) (blue and orange curves respectively), 2×Ez˜ ± z (k⊥) (green and purple), and Ez˜ ± tran (k∥) (red and burgundy) as a function of wavenumber kx, perpendicular wavenumber k⊥ = √ k 2 x + k 2 z and parallel wavenumber k∥ = ky. Right: As in the left panel except that we plot an estimated spectrum for Ez˜ ± tran (k⊥) (green and purple). See t… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Similar to view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Left: Power spectral densities EB¯ (kx), EB˜ (kx), and EB˜ (ky) for the mean and fluctuating magnetic field. Right: The corresponding PSDs for the mean and fluctuating kinetic energies ¯w and ˜w. 10−2 10−1 100 kde 10−12 10−10 10−8 10−6 10−4 PSD d −1 i ∝ k −11/3 x ∝ k −3/2 x ∝ k −5/3 y Z¯ +(kx) Z¯ −(kx) Z˜ +(kx) Z˜ −(kx) Z˜ +(ky) Z˜ −(ky) view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: PSDs Ez¯± (kx), Ez˜± (kx), and Ez˜± (ky) for the mean and fluctuating Els¨asser variables as a function of normalized kx and ky. The k = 0 component is removed. Ez¯+ (kx) ≃ Ez¯− (kx) ∝ k −11/3 x after removing the kx = 0 contribution. However, the PSDs of |z˜ ±| exhibit different power law slopes in kx and ky, with Ez˜+ (kx) ∝ k −5/3 x , Ez˜− (kx) ∝ k −3/2 x , and Ez˜+ (ky) ∼ Ez˜− (ky) ∝ k −5/3 y . Some s… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: A schematic illustrating a section of the highly dynamical chromosphere (M. Carlsson et al. 2019) showing magnetic field lines (solid black lines with arrows indicating direction), some of which represent closed loops of mixed polarity, including recently reconnected loops (identified by an “x”), purple-colored randomly oriented small-scale magnetic islands (projections of small-scale magnetic flux ropes)… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The figure illustrates the case of turbulence that is generated by the magnetic carpet only and that photospheric turbulence is entrained only by post-emergent flows associated with the emergence of magnetic carpet loops into the chromo￾sphere (M. J. Mart´ınez Gonz´alez et al. 2010). Plots from h = 0 – 2 Mm showing the expectations of the total energy per unit volume ⟨y⟩(h) J m−3 (red curves, left and mid… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: The figure illustrates the case of turbulence that is generated by the magnetic carpet only and that entrained photospheric turbulence is not included (M. J. Mart´ınez Gonz´alez et al. 2010). The more general form of the distribution f(U) equation (19) that distinguishes between possible flows in the chromosphere is used here instead of the simple (and unrealistic) single log-normal distribution used in view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: The figure illustrates the case of turbulence that is generated by the magnetic carpet and photospheric turbulence entrained by all four of the flows under consideration is included. We use the more general form of the distribution f(U) equation (19) that distinguishes between four possible flows in the chromosphere. Plots from h = 0 – 2 Mm showing the numerical (solid lines) and analytic estimates (dashe… view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Representative plots with the Kolmogorov factor αK = 1 showing the total energy density ¯ρ(h)⟨Z ∞2 ⟩(h) J m−3 (left column), the Els¨asser specific energy ⟨Z ∞2 ⟩(h) m2 s −2 (or J kg−1 , i.e., energy per unit mass) (left middle column), the heating rate H˙ J m−3 s −1 (right middle column), and the correlation length λc(h) km for four example type I and II spicules, differentiated by speed, U = 10 (black c… view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Plots that correspond to the middle panel of view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Low-frequency turbulence in the solar chromosphere remains poorly understood. We address 1) the sources of low-frequency turbulence that potentially heat the chromosphere, and 2) how turbulence is transported and dissipated throughout the chromosphere and lower corona. We use particle-in-cell simulations to investigate mixed polarity magnetic fields corresponding to emergent magnetic carpet field in coronal holes or quiet Sun regions for strong (imbalanced) and weak (balanced) guide magnetic fields. The initial mixed polarity magnetic field transitions rapidly to a turbulent state dominated by advected small-scale nonlinear structures, with a minority slab turbulence population and the emergent field is largely annihilated. Turbulence is anisotropic for imbalanced magnetic field and more isotropic for balanced cases. We develop a transport model for turbulence advected and dissipated throughout the chromosphere by randomly distributed energy-containing scale dynamical flows described by log-normal statistics. We compute the expectations for the total energy per unit volume <y>(h) J m^{-3}, the Elsasser specific energy <Z^{\infty 2}>(h) m^2 s^{-2}, the heating rate <\cdot{H}>(h) J m^{-3} s^{-1}, and the correlation length <{\lambda}>(h) km as functions of height h above the photosphere. Turbulent energy is injected into the low corona by a random "patchwork" of sites across the transition region surface. The expected energy injection rates <\cdot{S}> J m^{-2} s^{-1} for the chromosphere and at the base of the corona exceed the estimated energy requirements needed to heat both the chromosphere and corona. Similarly, we show that spicules can be heated gradually with increasing height by entrained magnetic carpet and photospheric turbulence.

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 reports particle-in-cell simulations of mixed-polarity magnetic fields representing the solar magnetic carpet, showing rapid transition to anisotropic (imbalanced guide field) or isotropic (balanced) turbulence with dominant advected nonlinear structures and largely annihilated emergent field. It then introduces a transport model in which energy-containing scale flows are assumed randomly distributed throughout the chromosphere and obey log-normal statistics; turbulence is injected via a random patchwork of sites at the transition region. Height-dependent expectations are computed for total energy density <y>(h), Elsasser energy <Z^∞²>(h), heating rate <H>(h), and correlation length <λ>(h). The central claim is that the resulting expected energy injection rates <S> exceed the energy requirements to heat the chromosphere and lower corona; spicules are also argued to be heated by entrained turbulence.

Significance. If the statistical assumptions hold and can be validated, the work would supply a concrete, observationally testable mechanism by which low-frequency turbulence from the magnetic carpet supplies the energy budget for chromospheric and coronal heating. The combination of PIC results on turbulence generation with an analytical transport model is a positive feature that could yield falsifiable predictions for height-dependent heating rates.

major comments (2)
  1. [Transport model and computation of expectations] The headline result that expected injection rates <S> exceed chromospheric and coronal heating requirements rests on the transport model whose inputs (log-normal parameters for energy-containing scale flows, random patchwork injection site density and strength) are free parameters not derived from or validated against the PIC simulation outputs. The simulations demonstrate turbulence and field annihilation but report no height-dependent statistical tests, correlation-length measurements, or distribution fits that would constrain these inputs.
  2. [Transport model] The expectations <y>(h), <Z^∞²>(h), <H>(h), and <λ>(h) are computed from an assumed log-normal distribution of randomly distributed dynamical flows, yet the manuscript provides no explicit derivation or justification linking this statistical form to the PIC results (which show rapid transition to turbulence but do not quantify the required height-dependent distributions or injection-site statistics).
minor comments (1)
  1. [Notation and definitions] Notation for expectations (e.g., <·S>, <H>(h)) should be defined explicitly at first use, with clear statements of which quantities are averaged over the random site distribution versus over the log-normal ensemble.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful review and for highlighting the potential significance of combining PIC simulations of magnetic carpet turbulence with a statistical transport model. We address the major comments on the transport model below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Transport model and computation of expectations] The headline result that expected injection rates <S> exceed chromospheric and coronal heating requirements rests on the transport model whose inputs (log-normal parameters for energy-containing scale flows, random patchwork injection site density and strength) are free parameters not derived from or validated against the PIC simulation outputs. The simulations demonstrate turbulence and field annihilation but report no height-dependent statistical tests, correlation-length measurements, or distribution fits that would constrain these inputs.

    Authors: We agree that the specific parameter values in the transport model (log-normal moments, injection-site density and strength) are not obtained by direct statistical fitting to the PIC outputs. The PIC runs are designed to demonstrate the rapid onset of turbulence and field annihilation from mixed-polarity carpet fields, while the transport model is a separate, height-dependent statistical description. In the revised manuscript we will add an explicit subsection that (i) motivates the log-normal form from the multiplicative nature of the advected nonlinear structures seen in the simulations and (ii) presents a sensitivity analysis showing that the headline conclusion <S> exceeding heating requirements remains robust across a plausible range of parameters consistent with observed carpet properties. We will also clarify that full height-resolved validation would require larger-domain, stratified simulations that are beyond the scope of the present work. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Transport model] The expectations <y>(h), <Z^∞²>(h), <H>(h), and <λ>(h) are computed from an assumed log-normal distribution of randomly distributed dynamical flows, yet the manuscript provides no explicit derivation or justification linking this statistical form to the PIC results (which show rapid transition to turbulence but do not quantify the required height-dependent distributions or injection-site statistics).

    Authors: The log-normal distribution is adopted because it is the natural outcome of multiplicative random processes that characterize the statistics of energy-containing eddies in developed turbulence; the PIC results show precisely such a rapid transition to a state dominated by advected nonlinear structures. We will revise the manuscript to include a concise derivation of why this statistical form is appropriate, referencing the observed dominance of advected structures and the annihilation of the emergent field in both the balanced and imbalanced cases. The height dependence itself is necessarily analytic because the PIC domain does not span the full chromospheric height range; we will state this limitation clearly and note that the model predictions can be tested against future observations of height-dependent correlation lengths and heating rates. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper uses PIC simulations to demonstrate rapid transition of mixed-polarity fields to anisotropic or isotropic turbulence with field annihilation. It then separately develops a transport model assuming randomly distributed energy-containing flows obeying log-normal statistics, with turbulence injected via a random patchwork of sites at the transition region. Expectations <y>(h), <Z^∞²>(h), <H>(h), <λ>(h), and <S> are computed from this model and compared to independent estimates of chromospheric/coronal heating requirements. No equation or step reduces by construction to its own inputs (no self-definition of the exceedance, no fitted parameter renamed as prediction, no load-bearing self-citation or uniqueness theorem). The statistical assumptions are explicit modeling choices whose justification is external to the derivation itself; the exceedance result is an output of the forward calculation rather than a tautology. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the assumption that chromospheric flows obey log-normal statistics and that turbulence is injected by a random patchwork of sites; these are introduced without independent empirical calibration in the abstract. No new particles or forces are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • log-normal parameters for energy-containing scale flows
    The distribution of dynamical flow scales is stated to follow log-normal statistics; the mean and variance are not derived from first principles and must be chosen to match the model.
  • random patchwork injection site density and strength
    The spatial distribution and amplitude of turbulent energy injection sites across the transition region are described as random; their statistical properties are free inputs to the transport calculation.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Turbulence generated by mixed-polarity magnetic fields can be treated as advected and dissipated by randomly distributed energy-containing flows
    Invoked to justify the statistical transport model throughout the chromosphere.
  • domain assumption PIC simulation results for strong and weak guide fields provide representative initial conditions for the transport model
    The transition from simulation output to statistical model assumes the simulated turbulence statistics are directly usable as input.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5672 in / 1598 out tokens · 47851 ms · 2026-05-07T10:43:28.825305+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

145 extracted references · 135 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2009, SoPh, 260, 43, doi: 10.1007/s11207-009-9433-7

    Abramenko, V., Yurchyshyn, V., & Watanabe, H. 2009, SoPh, 260, 43, doi: 10.1007/s11207-009-9433-7

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-009-9433-7 2009

  2. [2]

    I., Zank, G

    Abramenko, V. I., Zank, G. P., Dosch, A., et al. 2013, ApJ, 773, 167, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/773/2/167

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/773/2/167 2013

  3. [3]

    P., Telloni, D., et al

    Adhikari, L., Zank, G. P., Telloni, D., et al. 2024a, ApJ, 966, 52, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad3109

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad3109

  4. [4]

    P., Telloni, D., & Zhao, L

    Adhikari, L., Zank, G. P., Telloni, D., & Zhao, L. L. 2022, ApJL, 937, L29, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac91c6

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac91c6 2022

  5. [5]

    P., Zhao, L., et al

    Adhikari, L., Zank, G. P., Zhao, L., et al. 2024b, ApJ, 965, 94, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad2fc4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad2fc4

  6. [6]

    P., & Zhao, L

    Adhikari, L., Zank, G. P., & Zhao, L. L. 2020, ApJ, 901, 102, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abb132

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abb132 2020

  7. [7]

    2022, ApJL, 940, L13, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aca075

    Benzi, R. 2022, ApJL, 940, L13, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aca075

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aca075 2022

  8. [8]

    S., & Athay, R

    Anderson, L. S., & Athay, R. G. 1989, ApJ, 346, 1010, doi: 10.1086/168083

    work page doi:10.1086/168083 1989

  9. [9]

    Asgari-Targhi, M., & van Ballegooijen, A. A. 2012, ApJ, 746, 81, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/746/1/81

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/746/1/81 2012

  10. [10]

    Athay, R. G. 1966, ApJ, 146, 223, doi: 10.1086/148870

    work page doi:10.1086/148870 1966

  11. [11]

    I., & McKenzie, J

    Axford, W. I., & McKenzie, J. F. 1992, in Solar Wind Seven Colloquium, ed. E. Marsch & R. Schwenn, 1–5

    1992

  12. [12]

    2025, ApJL, 980, L20, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ada363

    Bailey, Z., Bandyopadhyay, R., Habbal, S., & Druckm¨ uller, M. 2025, ApJL, 980, L20, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ada363

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ada363 2025

  13. [13]

    , keywords =

    Bale, S. D., Drake, J. F., McManus, M. D., et al. 2023, Nature, 618, 252, doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-05955-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-05955-3 2023

  14. [14]

    H., McComas, D

    Bandyopadhyay, R., Matthaeus, W. H., McComas, D. J., et al. 2022, ApJL, 926, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ac4a5c

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac4a5c 2022

  15. [15]

    Beckers, J. M. 1968, SoPh, 3, 367, doi: 10.1007/BF00171614

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00171614 1968

  16. [16]

    Beckers, J. M. 1972, ARA&A, 10, 73, doi: 10.1146/annurev.aa.10.090172.000445

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.aa.10.090172.000445 1972

  17. [17]

    E., Slater, G., Hurlburt, N., et al

    Berger, T. E., Slater, G., Hurlburt, N., et al. 2010, ApJ, 716, 1288, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/716/2/1288

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/716/2/1288 2010

  18. [18]

    J., Albright, B., Yin, L., Bergen, B., & Kwan, T

    Bowers, K. J., Albright, B., Yin, L., Bergen, B., & Kwan, T. 2008, Physics of Plasmas (1994-present), 15, 055703

    2008

  19. [19]

    F., & Szabo, A

    Burlaga, L. F., & Szabo, A. 1999, SSRv, 87, 137, doi: 10.1023/A:1005186720589

    work page doi:10.1023/a:1005186720589 1999

  20. [20]

    Carlsson, M., De Pontieu, B., & Hansteen, V. H. 2019, ARA&A, 57, 189, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-052044

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081817-052044 2019

  21. [21]

    A publicly available simulation of an enhanced network region of the Sun

    Carlsson, M., Hansteen, V. H., Gudiksen, B. V., Leenaarts, J., & De Pontieu, B. 2016, A&A, 585, A4, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527226

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527226 2016

  22. [22]

    Carlsson, M., & Stein, R. F. 1997, ApJ, 481, 500, doi: 10.1086/304043

    work page doi:10.1086/304043 1997

  23. [23]

    Chandran, B. D. G. 2021, Journal of Plasma Physics, 87, 905870304, doi: 10.1017/S0022377821000052

    work page doi:10.1017/s0022377821000052 2021

  24. [24]

    Chandran, B. D. G., Dennis, T. J., Quataert, E., & Bale, S. D. 2011, ApJ, 743, 197, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/743/2/197

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/743/2/197 2011

  25. [25]

    Chandran, B. D. G., & Hollweg, J. V. 2009, ApJ, 707, 1659, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/707/2/1659

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/707/2/1659 2009

  26. [26]

    Chandran, B. D. G., & Perez, J. C. 2019, Journal of Plasma Physics, 85, 905850409, doi: 10.1017/S0022377819000540

    work page doi:10.1017/s0022377819000540 2019

  27. [27]

    R., & Molnar, M

    Cranmer, S. R., & Molnar, M. E. 2023, ApJ, 955, 68, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acee6c 40

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acee6c 2023

  28. [28]

    R., & van Ballegooijen, A

    Cranmer, S. R., & van Ballegooijen, A. A. 2010, ApJ, 720, 824, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/720/1/824

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/720/1/824 2010

  29. [29]

    R., van Ballegooijen, A

    Cranmer, S. R., van Ballegooijen, A. A., & Edgar, R. J. 2007, ApJS, 171, 520, doi: 10.1086/518001

    work page doi:10.1086/518001 2007

  30. [30]

    R., van Ballegooijen, A

    Cranmer, S. R., van Ballegooijen, A. A., & Woolsey, L. N. 2013, ApJ, 767, 125, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/767/2/125 De Moortel, I., & Browning, P. 2015, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 373, 20140269, doi: 10.1098/rsta.2014.0269 De Pontieu, B., McIntosh, S. W., Hansteen, V. H., &

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/767/2/125 2013

  31. [31]

    Schrijver, C. J. 2009, ApJL, 701, L1, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/701/1/L1 de Pontieu, B., McIntosh, S., Hansteen, V. H., et al. 2007, PASJ, 59, S655, doi: 10.1093/pasj/59.sp3.S655 De Pontieu, B., McIntosh, S. W., Carlsson, M., et al. 2011, Science, 331, 55, doi: 10.1126/science.1197738

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/701/1/l1 2009

  32. [32]

    H., Milano, L

    Dmitruk, P., Matthaeus, W. H., Milano, L. J., et al. 2002, ApJ, 575, 571, doi: 10.1086/341188

    work page doi:10.1086/341188 2002

  33. [33]

    J., & Matthaeus, W

    Dmitruk, P., Milano, L. J., & Matthaeus, W. H. 2001, ApJ, 548, 482, doi: 10.1086/318685 Druckm¨ uller, M., Habbal, S. R., & Morgan, H. 2014, ApJ, 785, 14, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/785/1/14

    work page doi:10.1086/318685 2001

  34. [34]

    Dryden, H. L. 1943, Quarterly of Applied Mathematics, 1, 7, doi: 10.1090/qam/8209

    work page doi:10.1090/qam/8209 1943

  35. [35]

    2015, in Astrophysics and Space Science

    Engvold, O. 2015, in Astrophysics and Space Science

    2015

  36. [37]

    A., & Plumpton, C

    Ferraro, C. A., & Plumpton, C. 1958, ApJ, 127, 459, doi: 10.1086/146474

    work page doi:10.1086/146474 1958

  37. [38]

    M., Avrett, E

    Fontenla, J. M., Avrett, E. H., & Loeser, R. 1993, ApJ, 406, 319, doi: 10.1086/172443

    work page doi:10.1086/172443 1993

  38. [39]

    2002, Astronomische Nachrichten, 323, 213, doi: 10.1002/1521- 3994(200208)323:3/4⟨213::AID-ASNA213⟩3.0.CO;2-H

    Freytag, B., Steffen, M., & Dorch, B. 2002, Astronomische Nachrichten, 323, 213, doi: 10.1002/1521- 3994(200208)323:3/4⟨213::AID-ASNA213⟩3.0.CO;2-H

    work page doi:10.1002/1521- 2002

  39. [40]

    V., Carlsson, M., Hansteen, V

    Gudiksen, B. V., Carlsson, M., Hansteen, V. H., et al. 2011, A&A, 531, A154, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201116520

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201116520 2011

  40. [41]

    R., Morgan, H., & Druckm¨ uller, M

    Habbal, S. R., Morgan, H., & Druckm¨ uller, M. 2014, ApJ, 793, 119, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/793/2/119

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/793/2/119 2014

  41. [42]

    R., Shaik, S

    Habbal, S. R., Shaik, S. B., Bailey, Z., et al. 2026, ApJ, 998, 51, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ae2ec7

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ae2ec7 2026

  42. [43]

    J., DeRosa, M

    Hagenaar, H. J., DeRosa, M. L., & Schrijver, C. J. 2008, ApJ, 678, 541, doi: 10.1086/533497

    work page doi:10.1086/533497 2008

  43. [44]

    1982a, ApJ, 259, 767, doi: 10.1086/160213

    Hammer, R. 1982a, ApJ, 259, 767, doi: 10.1086/160213

    work page doi:10.1086/160213

  44. [45]

    1982b, ApJ, 259, 779, doi: 10.1086/160214

    Hammer, R. 1982b, ApJ, 259, 779, doi: 10.1086/160214

    work page doi:10.1086/160214

  45. [46]

    Science 346(6207), 1255757 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1255757 arXiv:1412.3611 [astro-ph.SR]

    Hansteen, V., De Pontieu, B., Carlsson, M., et al. 2014, Science, 346, 1255757, doi: 10.1126/science.1255757

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1255757 2014

  46. [47]

    H., Carlsson, M., & Gudiksen, B

    Hansteen, V. H., Carlsson, M., & Gudiksen, B. 2007, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 368, The Physics of Chromospheric Plasmas, ed. P. Heinzel, I. Dorotoviˇ c, & R. J. Rutten, 107, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.0704.1511 Hinode Review Team, Al-Janabi, K., Antolin, P., et al. 2019, PASJ, 71, R1, doi: 10.1093/pasj/psz084

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.0704.1511 2007

  47. [48]

    Hollweg, J. V. 1976, J. Geophys. Res., 81, 1649, doi: 10.1029/JA081i010p01649

    work page doi:10.1029/ja081i010p01649 1976

  48. [49]

    Hollweg, J. V. 1982, ApJ, 257, 345, doi: 10.1086/159993

    work page doi:10.1086/159993 1982

  49. [50]

    Hunana, P., & Zank, G. P. 2010, ApJ, 718, 148, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/718/1/148

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/718/1/148 2010

  50. [51]

    Isobe, H., Proctor, M. R. E., & Weiss, N. O. 2008, ApJL, 679, L57, doi: 10.1086/589150

    work page doi:10.1086/589150 2008

  51. [52]

    D., Ran, H., & Cheng, W

    Jiao, Y., Liu, Y. D., Ran, H., & Cheng, W. 2024, ApJ, 960, 42, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad0dfe

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad0dfe 2024

  52. [53]

    , year = 2021, month = dec, volume =

    Kasper, J. C., Klein, K. G., Lichko, E., et al. 2021, PhRvL, 127, 255101, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.255101

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.127.255101 2021

  53. [55]

    Klimchuk, J. A. 2012b, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 117, A12102, doi: 10.1029/2012JA018170

    work page doi:10.1029/2012ja018170

  54. [56]

    Klimchuk, J. A. 2015, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 373, 20140256, doi: 10.1098/rsta.2014.0256

    work page doi:10.1098/rsta.2014.0256 2015

  55. [57]

    2019, ApJ, 884, 118, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4268

    Li, X., Guo, F., Li, H., Stanier, A., & Kilian, P. 2019, ApJ, 884, 118, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4268

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab4268 2019

  56. [58]

    F., & Engvold, O

    Lin, Y., Martin, S. F., & Engvold, O. 2008, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 383, Subsurface and Atmospheric Influences on Solar Activity, ed. R. Howe, R. W. Komm, K. S. Balasubramaniam, & G. J. D. Petrie, 235

    2008

  57. [59]

    E., Engvold, O., Rouppe Van Der Voort, L., & Frank, Z

    Lin, Y., Wiik, J. E., Engvold, O., Rouppe Van Der Voort, L., & Frank, Z. A. 2005, SoPh, 227, 283, doi: 10.1007/s11207-005-1111-9

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-005-1111-9 2005

  58. [60]

    2014, ApJ, 784, 120, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/784/2/120

    Lionello, R., Velli, M., Downs, C., et al. 2014, ApJ, 784, 120, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/784/2/120

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/784/2/120 2014

  59. [61]

    , keywords =

    Liu, Y. D., Ran, H., Hu, H., & Bale, S. D. 2023, ApJ, 944, 116, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acb345

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acb345 2023

  60. [62]

    Mackay, D. H. 2015, in Astrophysics and Space Science

    2015

  61. [64]

    H., Carlsson, M., et al

    Maltby, P., Avrett, E. H., Carlsson, M., et al. 1986, ApJ, 306, 284, doi: 10.1086/164342

    work page doi:10.1086/164342 1986

  62. [65]

    Martin, S. F. 2015, in Astrophysics and Space Science

    2015

  63. [66]

    415, Solar Prominences, ed

    Library, Vol. 415, Solar Prominences, ed. J.-C. Vial & O. Engvold, 205, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-10416-4 9 41

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-10416-4

  64. [67]

    F., & Echols, C

    Martin, S. F., & Echols, C. R. 1994, in NATO Advanced Study Institute (ASI) Series C, Vol. 433, Solar Surface Magnetism, ed. R. J. Rutten & C. J. Schrijver, 339

    1994

  65. [68]

    F., Lin, Y., & Engvold, O

    Martin, S. F., Lin, Y., & Engvold, O. 2008, SoPh, 250, 31, doi: 10.1007/s11207-008-9194-8 Mart´ ınez Gonz´ alez, M. J., Collados, M., Ruiz Cobo, B., &

    work page doi:10.1007/s11207-008-9194-8 2008

  66. [69]

    Solanki, S. K. 2007, A&A, 469, L39, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20077505 Mart´ ınez Gonz´ alez, M. J., Manso Sainz, R., Asensio

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20077505 2007

  67. [70]

    Ramos, A., & Bellot Rubio, L. R. 2010, ApJL, 714, L94, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/714/1/L94

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/714/1/l94 2010

  68. [71]

    2022, A&A, 668, A153, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244332

    Mathur, H., Joshi, J., Nagaraju, K., Rouppe van der Voort, L., & Bose, S. 2022, A&A, 668, A153, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202244332

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244332 2022

  69. [72]

    2010, ApJ, 710, 1857, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/710/2/1857

    Matsumoto, T., & Shibata, K. 2010, ApJ, 710, 1857, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/710/2/1857

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/710/2/1857 2010

  70. [73]

    Matthaeus, W., & Lamkin, S. L. 1986, The Physics of fluids, 29, 2513

    1986

  71. [74]

    H., Ambrosiano, J

    Matthaeus, W. H., Ambrosiano, J. J., & Goldstein, M. L. 1984, Physical Review Letters, 53, 1449, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.53.1449

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.53.1449 1984

  72. [75]

    H., Zank, G

    Matthaeus, W. H., Zank, G. P., & Oughton, S. 1996, J. Plasma Phys., 56, 659, doi: 10.1017/S0022377800019516

    work page doi:10.1017/s0022377800019516 1996

  73. [76]

    H., Zank, G

    Matthaeus, W. H., Zank, G. P., Oughton, S., Mullan, D. J., & Dmitruk, P. 1999, ApJL, 523, L93, doi: 10.1086/312259

    work page doi:10.1086/312259 1999

  74. [77]

    F., Axford, W

    McKenzie, J. F., Axford, W. I., & Banaszkiewicz, M. 1997, Geophys. Res. Lett., 24, 2877, doi: 10.1029/97GL02097

    work page doi:10.1029/97gl02097 1997

  75. [78]

    L., & Fung, P

    Moore, R. L., & Fung, P. C. W. 1972, SoPh, 23, 78, doi: 10.1007/BF00153893

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00153893 1972

  76. [79]

    2026, ApJ, in preparation

    Nakanotani, M., Asgari-Targhi, M., & Zank, G. 2026, ApJ, in preparation. https://arxiv.org/abs/1208.4404

    work page arXiv 2026

  77. [80]

    Nakanotani, M., & Zank, G. P. 2025, ApJL, 991, L48, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae07c3

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae07c3 2025

  78. [81]

    S., Murphy, N

    Ni, L., Lukin, V. S., Murphy, N. A., & Lin, J. 2018, ApJ, 852, 95, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa9edb

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa9edb 2018

  79. [82]

    A Reduced Magnetohydrodynamic Model of Coronal Heating in Open Magnetic Regions Driven by Reflected Low‐Frequency Alfven Waves

    Oughton, S., Matthaeus, W. H., Dmitruk, P., et al. 2001, ApJ, 551, 565, doi: 10.1086/320069

    work page doi:10.1086/320069 2001

  80. [83]

    Parker, E. N. 1972, ApJ, 174, 499, doi: 10.1086/151512

    work page doi:10.1086/151512 1972

Showing first 80 references.