2018
DOI: 10.1017/s002237781800003x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nonlinear waves and instabilities leading to secondary reconnection in reconnection outflows

Abstract: Reconnection outflows are regions of intense recent scrutiny, from in situ observations and from simulations. These regions are host to a variety of instabilities and intense energy exchanges, often even superior to the main reconnection site. We report here a number of results drawn from investigation of simulations. First, the outflows are observed to become unstable to drift instabilities. Second, these instabilities lead to the formation of secondary reconnection sites. Third, the secondary processes are r… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
16
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 56 publications
1
16
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In the magnetosheath downstream of the bow shock, the turbulence is mainly driven by the relative streaming ions or ion temperature anisotropy (Karimabadi et al., 2014), which has been fruitfully investigated for decades. Although a few mechanisms have been proposed to account for the turbulence generated by reconnection, such as the oblique tearing instability, Kelvin‐Helmholtz instability, kinetic Alfvén wave, interchange instability, drift‐type instability (such as the lower‐hybrid drift) or microscopic kinetic instabilities (Daughton et al., 2011; Huang et al., 2012, 2015; Lapenta et al., 2018; Zhong et al., 2018), what causes the turbulence in reconnection remains largely unexplored and is one of the most challenging topics for future research.…”
Section: Discussion and Summarymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the magnetosheath downstream of the bow shock, the turbulence is mainly driven by the relative streaming ions or ion temperature anisotropy (Karimabadi et al., 2014), which has been fruitfully investigated for decades. Although a few mechanisms have been proposed to account for the turbulence generated by reconnection, such as the oblique tearing instability, Kelvin‐Helmholtz instability, kinetic Alfvén wave, interchange instability, drift‐type instability (such as the lower‐hybrid drift) or microscopic kinetic instabilities (Daughton et al., 2011; Huang et al., 2012, 2015; Lapenta et al., 2018; Zhong et al., 2018), what causes the turbulence in reconnection remains largely unexplored and is one of the most challenging topics for future research.…”
Section: Discussion and Summarymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Energy flows can then be a diagnostics to identify developing instabilities in outflow, potentially leading to turbulence (Pucci et al, 2018).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In these two regions, LHW are commonly observed in the vicinity of magnetic reconnection sites where strong density gradients do form. Their role on the onset (or relaxation) of magnetic reconnection has been addressed in the past and still represents a key point in the context of reconnection research (Daughton 2003;Lapenta et al 2003Lapenta et al , 2018Yoo et al 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%