Abstract
This paper responds to points made by Low (Solar Phys.2010. doi:10.1007/s11207-010-9619-z) with regard to the Parker problem as formulated in Craig and Sneyd (Solar Phys.232, 41, 2005). We first point out that, since Low focuses mainly on interpreting approximate linearized solutions to the Parker problem, his approach cannot address key issues relating to the finite amplitude stability and dynamic accessibility of potential equilibria. Further difficulties are shown to surround Low’s assertion that non-linear equilibria derived by magneto-frictional relaxation of the Parker problem should be discounted. We conclude that both linear and non-linear approaches to the Parker problem appear remarkably consistent: they demonstrate the development of smooth 3D equilibria as opposed to the routine collapse to singular current sheets.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
