pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.17818 · v1 · pith:TU6S2JUHnew · submitted 2026-06-16 · ⚛️ physics.space-ph · astro-ph.HE· astro-ph.SR· physics.flu-dyn

High-energy Particle Transport in Three-dimensional Anisotropic Turbulent Magnetic Fields

Daniela Maci , Rony Keppens , Fabio Bacchini This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 21:55 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.space-ph astro-ph.HEastro-ph.SRphysics.flu-dyn
keywords high-energy particle transportanisotropic turbulencemagnetic fieldsparticle scatteringguide fieldspace physicsturbulent transport
0
0 comments X

The pith

In the absence of a guide magnetic field, high-energy particle scattering in anisotropic turbulence is not governed by the correlation length.

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

The paper uses synthetic three-dimensional anisotropic turbulent magnetic fields to track high-energy particle motion. It shows that without a uniform background or guide field, scattering does not follow the dependence on turbulence correlation length that is standard in other regimes. Comparison runs with an added guide field highlight a shift away from the usual pitch-angle diffusion description. A reader would care because transport models for cosmic rays and solar particles rely on these scattering rules across different space environments. The result suggests that the underlying interaction between particles and fluctuations changes when no dominant field direction is imposed.

Core claim

The paper establishes that, in the absence of a uniform background or guide magnetic field, the scattering process of high-energy particles in strongly turbulent anisotropic magnetic fields is not governed by the turbulence correlation length, indicating a scattering mechanism different from the pitch-angle diffusion used to describe scattering in strong-guide-field settings.

What carries the argument

Synthetic turbulent magnetic field realizations used to compute particle trajectories and scattering statistics in three-dimensional anisotropic turbulence.

If this is right

  • Scattering rates do not scale with the turbulence correlation length when no guide field is present.
  • A mechanism other than pitch-angle diffusion must be invoked to describe particle scattering in such fields.
  • Adding a guide field restores behavior closer to standard pitch-angle diffusion descriptions.
  • Transport calculations for high-energy particles must distinguish between guide-field and guide-field-free regimes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Cosmic-ray propagation models in astrophysical plasmas with weak or absent guide fields may require revised diffusion coefficients.
  • The result points to a possible role for large-scale field-line wandering or other global structures in controlling scattering.
  • Spacecraft observations in regions like the heliosheath could be re-analyzed to test for correlation-length independence.
  • Varying the degree of anisotropy in follow-on simulations would map the transition between the two scattering regimes.

Load-bearing premise

The synthetic turbulent magnetic field realizations accurately represent the statistical properties of real anisotropic turbulence in the absence of a guide field.

What would settle it

A measurement or simulation in which scattering times scale directly with the turbulence correlation length in the complete absence of a guide field would contradict the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.17818 by Daniela Maci, Fabio Bacchini, Rony Keppens.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: 2D power spectrum of the turbulent isotropic (left) and anisotropic (right) field. Black lines are isocontours of the spectrum, plotted at the same levels on both fields. tical anisotropic fluctuations in 3D through direction￾dependent parameters (D. Maci et al. 2024). The intro￾duction of anisotropy in the fields is intrinsically geo￾metric, and it is independent of the presence of a global background fie… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: 1D compensated power spectra for the isotropic (top panel) and anisotropic field (bottom panel). Vertical lines indicate the different values of gyroradius (i.e. different reduced rigidities) used to initialize the test particles. 3. TEST-PARTICLE SIMULATION FRAMEWORK AND SET-UP The test-particle simulations are performed within a new framework combining BxC and MPI-AMRVAC 3.04 (C. Xia et al. 2018; R. Kepp… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Parallel (dots) and perpendicular (triangles) mean free path as a function of normalized rigidity for isotropic (black) and anisotropic (orange) turbulent fields. In both isotropic and anisotropic fields adopted here, there is no background field. We now compare the scattering due to isotropic and anisotropic fluctuations without a background field. The results are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_f… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Parallel and perpendicular mean free path as a function of normalized rigidity for isotropic (top panel)and anisotropic (bottom panel) turbulence, with and without a uniform background field B0. 5. CONCLUSION We performed test-particle simulations of particle transport in high-resolution synthetic turbulent fields cheaply generated with BxC. The model’s flexibility al￾lowed us to analyze, for the first tim… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The understanding and modeling of high-energy particles transport in turbulent magnetic fields is an important open question in space- and astrophysics. The multiscale, nonlinear nature of turbulence, and the high variability of turbulence properties across different environments, make it particularly challenging to reach a full understanding of the interactions between particles and turbulent fluctuations. Using synthetic, realistically looking turbulent magnetic field realizations generated by the BxC toolkit, we investigate how the scattering of particles is affected by anisotropic fluctuations in strongly turbulent fields. We find evidence that, in the absence of a uniform background or guide magnetic field, the scattering process is not governed by the turbulence correlation length. We then further verify this hypothesis by studying particle transport in the presence of a guide field. We find evidence of a different scattering mechanism than the usual pitch-angle diffusion used to describe scattering in strong-guide-field settings.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses synthetic 3D anisotropic turbulent magnetic field realizations generated by the BxC toolkit to simulate high-energy particle transport. It reports evidence that, without a guide field, scattering is not controlled by the turbulence correlation length and proceeds via a mechanism distinct from standard pitch-angle diffusion, with the latter claim checked by repeating the runs in the presence of a guide field.

Significance. If the synthetic fields faithfully reproduce the relevant statistics of real guide-field-free turbulence, the result would require revision of quasi-linear and nonlinear transport theories used for cosmic-ray propagation in strong-turbulence astrophysical environments.

major comments (1)
  1. [Numerical setup / BxC toolkit description] The manuscript provides no validation, convergence tests, or direct comparison of the BxC-generated fields (power spectra, anisotropy ratios, absence of spurious mean-field effects) against MHD simulations or observations in the guide-field-free regime. Because the central claims rest entirely on particle trajectories computed in these realizations, this omission is load-bearing.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states the main findings but does not specify the particle rigidity range, the number of independent turbulence realizations, or the integration time relative to the correlation time; these details should be added for clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting the importance of validating the synthetic turbulence realizations. We address the single major comment below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate the requested material.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Numerical setup / BxC toolkit description] The manuscript provides no validation, convergence tests, or direct comparison of the BxC-generated fields (power spectra, anisotropy ratios, absence of spurious mean-field effects) against MHD simulations or observations in the guide-field-free regime. Because the central claims rest entirely on particle trajectories computed in these realizations, this omission is load-bearing.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript would be strengthened by explicit validation of the BxC-generated fields specifically in the guide-field-free regime. Although the BxC construction has been documented in earlier works, the present study’s central claims do depend on the statistical fidelity of these realizations. In the revised version we will add a new subsection (or appendix) that reports: (i) the realized power spectra and their comparison to the target anisotropic spectrum, (ii) measured anisotropy ratios as a function of wavenumber, (iii) verification that the volume-averaged field remains zero to machine precision, and (iv) direct quantitative comparisons of these diagnostics against published MHD simulations of strong, guide-field-free turbulence. We will also document convergence tests with respect to the number of Fourier modes and grid resolution, confirming that the reported particle transport statistics remain unchanged within statistical uncertainties. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: claims rest on direct simulation output

full rationale

The paper reports numerical findings on particle scattering from trajectories computed in BxC-generated synthetic fields, with no derivation chain, parameter fitting to data subsets, or predictions that reduce to the same inputs by construction. The abstract and description contain no self-definitional steps, fitted-input predictions, or load-bearing self-citations; the central claims (scattering independent of correlation length, distinct from pitch-angle diffusion) are presented as direct outputs of the simulations rather than tautologies. This is the most common honest non-finding for simulation papers.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated. The work implicitly relies on standard assumptions of MHD turbulence and numerical particle tracing.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5686 in / 992 out tokens · 16654 ms · 2026-06-26T21:55:18.022653+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

67 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Alouani-Bibi, F., & le Roux, J. A. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 781, 93, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/781/2/93

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/781/2/93 2014

  2. [2]

    2024, MNRAS, 529, 2399, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae723

    Bacchini, F., Ruan, W., & Keppens, R. 2024, MNRAS, 529, 2399, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stae723

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae723 2024

  3. [3]

    2019, Living Reviews in Computational Astrophysics, 5, 2, doi: 10.1007/s41115-019-0005-8

    Beresnyak, A. 2019, Living Reviews in Computational Astrophysics, 5, 2, doi: 10.1007/s41115-019-0005-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s41115-019-0005-8 2019

  4. [4]

    2011, ApJ, 728, 60, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/728/1/60

    Beresnyak, A., Yan, H., & Lazarian, A. 2011, ApJ, 728, 60, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/728/1/60

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/728/1/60 2011

  5. [5]

    W., & Matthaeus, W

    Bieber, J. W., & Matthaeus, W. H. 1997, ApJ, 485, 655

    1997

  6. [6]

    M., 2011, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17821.x , 411, 1917

    Bykov, A. M., Osipov, S. M., & Ellison, D. C. 2011, MNRAS, 410, 39, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17421.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2010.17421.x 2011

  7. [7]

    Cametti, F., Carbone, V., & Veltri, P. 1998, J. Phys. IV, 08, Pr6

    1998

  8. [8]

    2001, Physical Review D, 65, doi: 10.1103/physrevd.65.023002

    Casse, F., Lemoine, M., & Pelletier, G. 2001, Physical Review D, 65, doi: 10.1103/physrevd.65.023002

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.65.023002 2001

  9. [9]

    Chandran, B. D. G. 2000, PhRvL, 85, 4656, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.4656

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.85.4656 2000

  10. [10]

    2016, A&A, 588, A73, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527376

    Cohet, R., & Marcowith, A. 2016, A&A, 588, A73, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201527376

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201527376 2016

  11. [11]

    Dundovic, A., Pezzi, O., Blasi, P., Evoli, C., & Matthaeus, W. H. 2020, Phys. Rev. D, 102, 103016

    2020

  12. [12]

    2022, PhRvE, 106, 025307, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.106.025307

    Durrive, J.-B., Changmai, M., Keppens, R., et al. 2022, PhRvE, 106, 025307, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.106.025307

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.106.025307 2022

  13. [13]

    Thermodynamics and dynamics of two-dimensional systems with dipole-like repulsive interactions

    Elmegreen, B. G., & Scalo, J. 2004, ARA&A, 42, 211, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.41.011802.094859

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.41.011802.094859 2004

  14. [14]

    L., Engelbrecht, N

    Els, P. L., Engelbrecht, N. E., Lang, J. T., & Strauss, R. D. 2024, ApJ, 975, 134, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad7c44

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ad7c44 2024

  15. [15]

    E., Effenberger, F., Florinski, V., et al

    Engelbrecht, N. E., Effenberger, F., Florinski, V., et al. 2022, SSRv, 218, 33, doi: 10.1007/s11214-022-00896-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s11214-022-00896-1 2022

  16. [16]

    2015, ApJ, 814, 77, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/814/1/77 9 Falceta-Gon¸ calves, D., Kowal, G., Falgarone, E., & Chian, A

    Esquivel, A., Lazarian, A., & Pogosyan, D. 2015, ApJ, 814, 77, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/814/1/77 9 Falceta-Gon¸ calves, D., Kowal, G., Falgarone, E., & Chian, A. C.-L. 2014, Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics, 21, 587, doi: 10.5194/npg-21-587-2014

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/814/1/77 2015

  17. [17]

    1995, ApJ, 438, 763, doi: 10.1086/175121

    Goldreich, P., & Sridhar, S. 1995, ApJ, 438, 763, doi: 10.1086/175121

    work page doi:10.1086/175121 1995

  18. [18]

    E., & Sturrock, P

    Hall, D. E., & Sturrock, P. A. 1967, Physics of Fluids, 10, 2620, doi: 10.1063/1.1762084

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1762084 1967

  19. [19]

    1970, ApJ, 162, 1049, doi: 10.1086/150736

    Hasselmann, K., & Wibberenz, G. 1970, ApJ, 162, 1049, doi: 10.1086/150736

    work page doi:10.1086/150736 1970

  20. [20]

    2015, in Astrophysics and Space Science

    Haverkorn, M. 2015, in Astrophysics and Space Science

    2015

  21. [21]

    407, Magnetic Fields in Diffuse Media, ed

    Library, Vol. 407, Magnetic Fields in Diffuse Media, ed. A. Lazarian, E. M. de Gouveia Dal Pino, & C. Melioli, 483, doi: 10.1007/978-3-662-44625-6 17

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-662-44625-6

  22. [22]

    S., Wicks, R

    Horbury, T. S., Wicks, R. T., & Chen, C. H. K. 2012, SSRv, 172, 325, doi: 10.1007/s11214-011-9821-9

    work page doi:10.1007/s11214-011-9821-9 2012

  23. [23]

    2014, ApJ, 785, 31, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/785/1/31

    Hussein, M., & Shalchi, A. 2014, ApJ, 785, 31, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/785/1/31

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/785/1/31 2014

  24. [24]

    2013, A&A, 558, A72, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322013

    Iacobelli, M., Haverkorn, M., Orr´ u, E., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A72, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322013

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322013 2013

  25. [25]

    Jokipii, J. R. 1966, ApJ, 146, 480

    1966

  26. [26]

    1994, Phys

    Stolovitzky, G. 1994, Phys. Rev. E, 49, 5179

    1994

  27. [27]

    , keywords =

    Kempski, P., Fielding, D. B., Quataert, E., et al. 2023, MNRAS, 525, 4985, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stad2609

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stad2609 2023

  28. [28]

    F., & Engelmann, F

    Kennel, C. F., & Engelmann, F. 1966, Physics of Fluids, 9, 2377, doi: 10.1063/1.1761629

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1761629 1966

  29. [29]

    P., Zhou, Y., et al

    Keppens, R., Braileanu, B. P., Zhou, Y., et al. 2023, A & A, 673, A66

    2023

  30. [30]

    Journal of Plasma Physics , keywords =

    Lemoine, M. 2023, Journal of Plasma Physics, 89, 175890501, doi: 10.1017/S0022377823000946 L¨ ubke, J., Effenberger, F., Wilbert, M., Fichtner, H., &

    work page doi:10.1017/s0022377823000946 2023

  31. [31]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.15320, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.15320 L¨ ubke, J., Reichherzer, P., Effenberger, F., et al

    Grauer, R. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2509.15320, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2509.15320 L¨ ubke, J., Reichherzer, P., Effenberger, F., et al. 2024, in AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, Vol. 2024, AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, SH44B–06 L¨ ubke, J., Friedrich, J., & Grauer, R. 2023, Journal of Physics: Complexity, 4, 015005

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.15320 2025

  32. [32]

    2024, ApJS, 273, 11, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad4bdf

    Maci, D., Keppens, R., & Bacchini, F. 2024, ApJS, 273, 11, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad4bdf

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ad4bdf 2024

  33. [33]

    2025, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2997, 012003, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/2997/1/012003

    Maci, D., Keppens, R., & Bacchini, F. 2025, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2997, 012003, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/2997/1/012003

    work page doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2997/1/012003 2025

  34. [34]

    2016,Phys

    Malara, F., Di Mare, F., Nigro, G., & Sorriso-Valvo, L. 2016,Phys. Rev. E,94, 053109

    2016

  35. [35]

    H., Goldstein, M

    Matthaeus, W. H., Goldstein, M. L., & Roberts, D. A. 1990, J. Geophys. Res., 95, 20673, doi: 10.1029/JA095iA12p20673

    work page doi:10.1029/ja095ia12p20673 1990

  36. [36]

    H., Qin, G., Bieber, J

    Matthaeus, W. H., Qin, G., Bieber, J. W., & Zank, G. P. 2003, ApJL, 590, L53

    2003

  37. [37]

    2020, Ap&SS, 365, 135

    Mertsch, P. 2020, Ap&SS, 365, 135

    2020

  38. [38]

    Burger, R. A. 2009, Journal of Geophysical Research (Space Physics), 114, A01102, doi: 10.1029/2008JA013349

    work page doi:10.1029/2008ja013349 2009

  39. [39]

    2026, A&A, 706, A32, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202557693

    Mora, C., Bacchini, F., & Keppens, R. 2026, A&A, 706, A32, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202557693

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202557693 2026

  40. [40]

    2025, Physics of Plasmas, 32, 022106, doi: 10.1063/5.0244271

    Nishimura, Y. 2025, Physics of Plasmas, 32, 022106, doi: 10.1063/5.0244271

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0244271 2025

  41. [41]

    H., Wan, M., & Osman, K

    Oughton, S., Matthaeus, W. H., Wan, M., & Osman, K. T. 2015, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A:

    2015

  42. [42]

    Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 373, 20140152, doi: 10.1098/rsta.2014.0152

    work page doi:10.1098/rsta.2014.0152 2014

  43. [43]

    2024, MNRAS, 529, L13

    Pezzi, O., & Blasi, P. 2024, MNRAS, 529, L13

    2024

  44. [44]

    2011, A&A, 532, A68, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117182

    Plotnikov, I., Pelletier, G., & Lemoine, M. 2011, A&A, 532, A68, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201117182

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201117182 2011

  45. [45]

    J., Lyutikov, M., & Engelbrecht, N

    Porth, O., Vorster, M. J., Lyutikov, M., & Engelbrecht, N. E. 2016, MNRAS, 460, 4135, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stw1152

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stw1152 2016

  46. [46]

    2016, MNRAS, 459, 3395

    Pucci, F., Malara, F., Perri, S., et al. 2016, MNRAS, 459, 3395

    2016

  47. [47]

    G., Merten, L., & Pueschel, M

    Reichherzer, P., Becker Tjus, J., Zweibel, E. G., Merten, L., & Pueschel, M. J. 2020, MNRAS, 498, 5051

    2020

  48. [48]

    2018, ApJS, 235, 21, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aab114

    Ripperda, B., Bacchini, F., Teunissen, J., et al. 2018, ApJS, 235, 21, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/aab114

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4365/aab114 2018

  49. [49]

    Ruffolo, D., Chuychai, P., & Matthaeus, W. H. 2006, ApJ, 644, 971

    2006

  50. [50]

    Saur, J., Politano, H., Pouquet, A., & Matthaeus, W. H. 2002, A&A, 386, 699, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20020305

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20020305 2002

  51. [51]

    2002, Cosmic Ray Astrophysics

    Schlickeiser, R. 2002, Cosmic Ray Astrophysics

    2002

  52. [52]

    2005, Physics of Plasmas, 12, 052905, doi: 10.1063/1.1895805

    Shalchi, A. 2005, Physics of Plasmas, 12, 052905, doi: 10.1063/1.1895805

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1895805 2005

  53. [53]

    W., Matthaeus, W

    Shalchi, A., Bieber, J. W., Matthaeus, W. H., & Qin, G. 2004, ApJ, 616, 617

    2004

  54. [54]

    C., & Schlickeiser, R

    Shalchi, A., Skoda, T., Tautz, R. C., & Schlickeiser, R. 2009, A&A, 507, 589, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/200912755

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200912755 2009

  55. [55]

    2017, ApJL, 839, L16

    Shukurov, Snodin, Seta, Bushby, & Wood. 2017, ApJL, 839, L16

    2017

  56. [56]

    P., Shukurov, A., Sarson, G

    Snodin, A. P., Shukurov, A., Sarson, G. R., Bushby, P. J., & Rodrigues, L. F. S. 2016, MNRAS, 457, 3975

    2016

  57. [57]

    Matthaeus, W. H. 2014 796, 97, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/796/2/97

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/796/2/97 2014

  58. [58]

    C., Shalchi, A., & Schlickeiser, R

    Tautz, R. C., Shalchi, A., & Schlickeiser, R. 2008, ApJ, 672, 642, doi: 10.1086/524126

    work page doi:10.1086/524126 2008

  59. [59]

    2019, ApJ, 887, 160, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab517b

    Telloni, D., Carbone, F., Bruno, R., et al. 2019, ApJ, 887, 160, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab517b

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab517b 2019

  60. [60]

    G., & Oh, S

    Wiener, J., Zweibel, E. G., & Oh, S. P. 2018, MNRAS, 473, 3095, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx2603 10

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stx2603 2018

  61. [61]

    2025, ApJ, 992, 81, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adfed4

    Wu, H., Guo, Y., Keppens, R., et al. 2025, ApJ, 992, 81, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/adfed4

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/adfed4 2025

  62. [62]

    2018, ApJS, 234, 30

    Xia, C., Teunissen, J., El Mellah, I., Chan´ e, E., & Keppens, R. 2018, ApJS, 234, 30

    2018

  63. [63]

    2025, A&A, 699, A317, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453340

    Xiao, Y.-W., Zhang, J.-F., & Xu, S. 2025, A&A, 699, A317, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202453340

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202453340 2025

  64. [64]

    2002, PhRvL, 89, 281102, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.281102

    Yan, H., & Lazarian, A. 2002, PhRvL, 89, 281102, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.281102

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.89.281102 2002

  65. [65]

    H., et al

    Yang, Y., Wan, M., Matthaeus, W. H., et al. 2019, Physics of Plasmas, 26, 072306, doi: 10.1063/1.5099360

    work page doi:10.1063/1.5099360 2019

  66. [66]

    2025, PhRvD, 111, 123050, doi: 10.1103/mzkz-z24p

    Zeng, S., Bai, X.-N., & Sun, X. 2025, PhRvD, 111, 123050, doi: 10.1103/mzkz-z24p

    work page doi:10.1103/mzkz-z24p 2025

  67. [67]

    2000, Phys

    Zimbardo, G., Veltri, P., & Pommois, P. 2000, Phys. Rev. E, 61, 1940

    2000